world

Lawmakers optimistic as border talks back on track

43 Comments
By Jonathan Lemire and Alan Fram

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2019 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

43 Comments
Login to comment

Trump somehow thinks that doing the same thing is going to suddenly lead to a different conclusion.

Theres no wall coming Trumpy boy. No wall.

4 ( +9 / -5 )

Not being for an ineffective albatross of a wall does not mean democrats want to allow criminals into the country. It's hyperbolic nonsense such as this that is paralyzingly our country.

3 ( +7 / -4 )

Trump has no leverage and no popular support. He negotiated himself into a corner like an idiot.

His only options:

Admit defeat and drop his demands.

Close the government and take the blame

Declare a national emergency which would be a win for Democrats.

Agree to a bigger deal with no wall that allows Dems to take the lead on security.

And don't forget that this is the genius we are sending in to negotiate with North Korea. Unless he has a hammer with some leverage Trump is useless.

4 ( +8 / -4 )

Acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney, in appearances on NBC's "Meet the Press" and "Fox News Sunday," said "you absolutely cannot" eliminate the possibility of another shutdown if a deal is not reached over the wall and other border matters. The White House had asked for $5.7 billion, a figure rejected by the Democratic-controlled House.

Go for it Donnie - shut down the government again and show everyone once more that you're incompetent and can't lead.  Throw everything into chaos and hurt federal workers and their families - and endanger our country from terrorists coming through our air and sea ports.

Trump Shutdown II - brought to you by the Great Orange Incompetent-in-Chief...

4 ( +8 / -4 )

Just leaving this here, with facts, about El Paso (where I lived from 2000-2003, and up the road in Albuquerque from 2003-2005)

https://us.cnn.com/videos/politics/2019/02/11/jake-tapper-trump-lying-to-you-border-wall-el-paso-sot-lead-vpx.cnn

3 ( +5 / -2 )

Not being for an ineffective albatross of a wall does not mean democrats want to allow criminals into the country. It's hyperbolic nonsense such as this that is paralyzingly our country.

The elimination of ICE law enforcement and sanctuaries for criminal aliens says otherwise. Importing voters to win power over rules the rule of law every time.

-5 ( +3 / -8 )

Don't forget this:

"Mick Mulvaney in 2015 claimed a barrier would not stop illegal immigrants from crossing the border and ranchers told him they don’t need a fence. Mulvaney said enforcing the current law with more manpower and better technology would bolster border patrol .... “And by the way, the bottom line is the fence doesn’t stop anybody who really wants to get across,” Mulvaney said in the interview. “You go under, you go around, you go through it. And that’s what the ranchers tell us, is that they don’t need a fence. What they need is more manpower, and more technology, and more willingness to enforce the law as it exists today. There are parts of our border that are secure and parts of our border that are not. A lot of that comes down to whether or not we are just willing to enforce the law as it exists. So it’s easy to tell people what they want to hear, ‘build the darn fence, vote for me.’” 

Mulvaney called Trump “a terrible human being” during a November 2016 congressional debate. CNN reported on Monday that Mulvaney also said in October 2016 Trump would be disqualified from office in an “ordinary universe.”

---- from The New York Post

4 ( +7 / -3 )

The elimination of ICE law enforcement and sanctuaries for criminal aliens says otherwise. Importing voters to win power over rules the rule of law every time.

Just stop with the far-right fairly tales - The Democratic party has never included in its platform the elimination of ICE or for allowing criminals to enter our country - log off from the Alex Jones conspiracy theories...

But Republicans and voter suppression and fraud, oh yea, big time...

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2018/12/11/north-carolina-voter-fraud-raises-questions-republican-party-editorials-debates/2279938002/

But perhaps by criminal aliens you meant all those employed at Mar-A-Lago and the Trump golf courses?

https://www.axios.com/trump-organization-illegal-immigrants-a15ff2d9-6906-4208-aefa-1d284c42a7cf.html

2 ( +6 / -4 )

Democrats have proposed reducing the current number of beds ICE uses to detain immigrants here illegally from 40,520 to 35,520.

Interesting negotiating tactic. It has logic - to limit the amount of illegal immigrants detained so as to permit those not convicted of crimes free pending court - but it's also something Dems could easily cave on in exchange for border funds. So Trump would get the current number of beds, no money for the wall, and call it victory.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

The elimination of ICE law enforcement and sanctuaries for criminal aliens says otherwise.

Sigh. ICE is not being eliminated, and sanctuary cities do not say otherwise. You guys are just fearmongering out of bitterness that American won't pay for the wall Mexico was supposed to pay for.

Importing voters to win power over rules the rule of law every time.

Then why does the right always use so many illegal voters in elections?

3 ( +5 / -2 )

The elimination of ICE law enforcement and sanctuaries for criminal aliens says otherwise. Importing voters to win power over rules the rule of law every time.

Stranger and Lincoln handled this nonsense handily.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

So... $1.4 Billion before the first shut down....

And $1.4 Billion now.

Wow, great wheelin' and dealin' there, Mr. Art Of The Deal.

You got hammered by the voters, lost a ton of support, and got....

absolutely nothing for it except exposed.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

not if its 1.4 billion that includes funding for building a wall. If so, then we just ask for more money in September to continue building the wall next year.

You could at least wait until the text has been released and Trump has signed it before you start any premature celebrations.

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

Yes, ICE isnt being eliminated. But only because the voters wont let you.

You might want to check whats been coming out of Dems mouths relating to this issue.

Its "not part of the Dem platform" doesnt mean Dems arent running around saying it and supporting the abolishment of ICE if they could. Luckily. they cant.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

Its "not part of the Dem platform" doesnt mean Dems arent running around saying it and supporting the abolishment of ICE if they could. Luckily. they cant.

So you’re blaming the democrats for something that’s not part of their platform. Got it.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

He will probably sign it. Doesn't have any leverage anymore and it's his best option. His Poll numbers keep falling as American's feel the impact of Trump's economic missteps and broken promises, which include the wall, not to mention the promise of Mexico paying! lol

1 ( +3 / -2 )

He will probably sign it.

At this point, the negotiations are to find a way that both parties can leave saving face. The pubs know that their leverage is mostly non-existent, so we can rest safe that it will be more in the direction of a bipartisan agreement than what Trump was trying to "negotiate".

2 ( +4 / -2 )

His poll numbers are actually up.

and if he gets WALL funding, we can simply go back in 6 months and ask for more. The dems whole point is you won’t find a wall. If you do, then every year from now on is just “how much?”.

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

His poll numbers are actually up.

and if he gets WALL funding, we can simply go back in 6 months and ask for more. The dems whole point is you won’t find a wall. If you do, then every year from now on is just “how much?”.

His polls are up, on alt-right media.

Can always ask for more in 6 months, but probably won't get it. Besides, who knows what mess the oval office will be in 6 months from now...I'm guessing we will have much more pressing matters to attend to, and Trump will have his own personal issues to deal with when that time comes.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

and if he gets WALL funding, we can simply go back in 6 months and ask for more.

lets see 1.4 billion for a 25 billion wall. Trump wont have enough time as POTUS to get the funding let alone build his 30ft high ocean to ocean wall. Heres an idea how about a smart wall, with surveillance some wall , some fence, what the Dems proposed before the shut down.

His poll numbers are actually up.

hardly about .5% and well below what he started with as POTUS, average of all major polls not just the alt right ones most notiable his disapproval rating is 11 points higher than when he started.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/

5 ( +7 / -2 )

At this point, the negotiations are to find a way that both parties can leave saving face.

nah unless Trump gets his full 5.6billion and the total 25billion for his ocean to ocean wall there will b no saving face for him, he made his bed with his recalcitrant idiocy, he can sleep in it.

5 ( +7 / -2 )

9 democrats want to abolish ICE and replace it with something else, but that suddenly becomes every democrat according to Trumpophiles. Nice accuracy there, Sport.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Where did we say every Democrat? Just like every Democrat doesn’t wear blackface. Does that justify the ones who do or the ones who do want to abolish ICE? Nope.

you always call people names when you start losing.

-5 ( +3 / -8 )

If you fund any wall at all, then we just take unused money from other places and add to the funding.

your whole argument is that the wall is immoral and unnecessary. If we prove it’s not and it is, then we can ask for 10 billion next year.

-6 ( +1 / -7 )

Its "not part of the Dem platform" doesnt mean Dems arent running around saying it and supporting the abolishment of ICE if they could. Luckily. they cant.

Someone should write more clearly.

I'm not calling anyone names and I'm certainly not losing anything given I approach things from reality.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

South to north border crossing have been dropping for the past decade. This means a wall is unnecessary.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

your whole argument is that the wall is immoral and unnecessary. If we prove it’s not and it is, then we can ask for 10 billion next year.

How can you prove it's not immoral, when Trump immediately started his campaign on the wall with a moral argument based purely in Mexicans being rapists and murderers. Sorry, but that ship sailed long ago.

And we've already shown how the wall isn't necessary. It's not like you guys are going to come up with some new tack that you haven't already had shot down.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

Ok then I fully expect that the Dems will be providing no funding for an immoral and unnecessary wall. If you do, then it isnt immoral and is necessary.

You always sneak in your little "sport" and "champ" when you are insecure in the correctness of your point of view.

I'm not calling anyone names and I'm certainly not losing anything given I approach things from reality.

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

Ok then I fully expect that the Dems will be providing no funding for an immoral and unnecessary wall.

Heh, expect? You don't even need to expect, it's been quite clear by the fact that they didn't give into Trump's ultimatum during his 30+ day shutdown.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

Ha-Ha...... Trump blasted that “New Green Deal” & late term abortion proposal at rally.

Virginia is going Red 2020. Ha-Ha!

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

If you fund any wall at all, then we just take unused money from other places and add to the funding.

your whole argument is that the wall is immoral and unnecessary. If we prove it’s not and it is, then we can ask for 10 billion next year.

I imagined you would know better. Trump can't just "take" appropriated money and use it for wall funding. If he could, we wouldn't have this issue...

I'm not sure where you plan on finding anything that proves the wall to be moral when Trump began the idea for building it on a completely rude and immoral, extremely racist ideals, but you can waste your time looking if you like.

Where did we say every Democrat? Just like every Democrat doesn’t wear blackface. Does that justify the ones who do or the ones who do want to abolish ICE? Nope.

Seems like you are losing the argument because you are forced to bring other conversations into the argument.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

we just take unused money from other places and add to the funding.

"Unused money"? Um....

Someone doesn't seem to understand that the American budget runs on a deficit, not a surplus.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

umm there are billions of dollars of unused money in the US government.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

umm there are billions of dollars of unused money in the US government.

Of course there is. Money isn't used, until it is.

But you seem to be talking about unbudgeted money - aka not marked for use somewhere else.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

But many legal scholars say there is a way Trump could act legally. Current law allows the Defense Department to use “un-obligated” money to fund construction projects during war or emergencies. “The Department of Defense has funds in its account that are not specifically designated for anything,” Harvard Law School professor Mark Tushnet told NBC News. “My instinct is to say that if he declares a national emergency and uses this pot of unappropriated money for the wall, he’s on very solid legal ground.”

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/01/trump-border-wall-construction-pentagon/

unobligated, unappropriated, whatever. Money exists that is not specifically restricted to being used for just one thing.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

“un-obligated” money to fund construction projects during war or emergencies.

Yes, he can declare a national emergency, something neither the democrats nor the republicans want. This would also face legal challenges, I'm sure. I'm not informed well enough to say whether he is on "solid legal ground" to do so, but I'm guessing he is, and I'm also guessing there is equal grounds for challenging him. Would be a pretty messy road. I think he would take a pretty big hit by using eminent domain to snatch up the land needed which is privately owned. I don't think he's that stupid, do you?

He can take the deal, and continue working on his re-election campaign. The alt-right will still vote for him, even if people like Hannity and Coulter bash him for taking it. Or, he can set off down a pretty difficult road that might leave him in an even worse position, and not even partial funding for the wall. Democrats are showing willingness to compromise and partake in bi-partisanship with the GOP. Will Trump?

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Sure he will. As long as you don’t try that “we will give you money but you can’t use it for a wall” trick.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Trump's style of compromise:

I want a wall.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Trump has no leverage and no popular support. He negotiated himself into a corner like an idiot.

His only options:

Admit defeat and drop his demands.

Close the government and take the blame 

He has a few options, for one thing, there wouldn’t be a cap on where the President could seek funds from somewhere else.

Declare a national emergency which would be a win for Democrats.

Agree to a bigger deal with no wall that allows Dems to take the lead on security.

Actually, he could on paper call it whatever the Democrats want him to call it and take it from there, at the same time, no DACA deal, so they get screwed again....but Trump gets some money.

And don't forget that this is the genius we are sending in to negotiate with North Korea. Unless he has a hammer with some leverage Trump is useless.

Whereas the other Presidents never even attempted to try. They were too busy counting the Dividends with Iran for some odd reason, well, now that’s over, not to mention Trump should he sign this deal can increase the amount of beds in the detention center, so they do their catch and release and Trump can stacking the beds up, thereby keep8ng them indefinitely, genius. So basically, the Dems won a victory and so did Trump, not the best of deals, but both sides walk away with at least something.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

The Democratic party has never included in its platform the elimination of ICE or for allowing criminals to enter our country

If 1 democrat said it, even just once, then they all believe it. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2018/10/22/abolish-ice-potent-campaign-slogan-candidates-both-parties/1729041002/ Say it last month, last year, 10 yrs ago ... all the same. It was definitely used in the mid-term elections last fall. So they are liars?

That's the logic you use for republicans, so it has to work for dems too.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

So you’re blaming the democrats for something that’s not part of their platform. Got it.

Why not? Don't you agree with EVERYTHING Clinton or Bernie or Obama or Pelosi or Biden or Stacey Abrams has said the last 50 yrs?

What about Governor Gavin Newsom?

Why expect the same from republicans?

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Why not? Don't you agree with EVERYTHING Clinton or Bernie or Obama or Pelosi or Biden or Stacey Abrams has said the last 50 yrs?

No. I agree with the things I agree with, and I disagree with the things I disagree with, and I'm ok with disagreeing with everyone else when those times happen. I've never been shy about expressing disappointment in Obama (Snowden, drones), nor have I had a problem with voicing agreement with Trump (China intellectual property rights).

What about Governor Gavin Newsom?

Why expect the same from republicans?

I'm not clear what you are asking. Why should I expect Republicans to not blame the Democratic platform for something that's part of the Democratic platform? I think that's self evident is it not?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites