Trump will sign border security bill, declare national emergency, White House says
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
The Senate on Thursday afternoon approved a border security package to avert another government shutdown, as the White House said President Trump is preparing to take the extraordinary step of declaring a national emergency to obtain additional funding for his long-proposed wall on the U.S.-Mexico border.
The bill passed 83-16. The border security compromise now heads to the House for a vote.
Before the Senate vote, White House press secretary Sarah Sanders said the president would sign the compromise bill, and would take executive action to unlock other federal dollars for the wall.
“President Trump will sign the government funding bill, and as he has stated before, he will also take other executive action -- including a national emergency -- to ensure we stop the national security and humanitarian crisis at the border," Sanders said in a statement. "The president is once again delivering on his promise to build the wall, protect the border, and secure our great country.”
Lawmakers have until 11:59 p.m. Friday to get the agreement through both houses of Congress and signed by Trump before several Cabinet-level departments shut down and hundreds of thousands of federal workers are furloughed in what would be the second partial government shutdown this year.
Sanders told reporters at the White House there will be announcement later about where the money will come from and how they allocate it. She said the White House is working on those details.
Asked if they were afraid of legal challenges, Sarah said, “We are very prepared but there shouldn’t be. The president is doing his job and Congress should do theirs.”
Speaking on the Senate floor earlier, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said he supports Trump declaring a national emergency to fund the border wall, something the president has suggested for weeks he might do.
But Democrats in Congress said they hoped Trump wouldn't declare an emergency.
"It’s a terrible idea," Delaware Sen. Chris Coons told Fox News. "We will all live to regret this one.”
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., told reporters Democrats "are reviewing our options."
There are at least 30 national emergencies in effect in the United States as of this month, according to a tabulation prepared by the Congressional Research Service.
The product of nearly three weeks of talks, the border security agreement would provide almost $1.4 billion for new barriers along the boundary. That's less than the $1.6 billion for border security in a bipartisan Senate bill that Trump spurned months ago, and enough for building just 55 miles of barricades, not the 200-plus miles he'd sought.
When asked Wednesday if they had an agreement that Trump would approve, Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Richard Shelby, R-Ala., told reporters: "We think so. We hope so."
The president, though, had been noncommittal about signing.
“Well, we haven’t gotten it yet,” Trump told reporters at the White House on Wednesday. “We’ll be getting it and we’ll be looking for land mines — because you could have that.”
Trump's assent would end a raucous legislative saga that commenced before Christmas and appeared to approach its ending, almost fittingly, on Valentine's Day. The low point was the historically long 35-day partial federal shutdown, which Trump sparked and was in full force when Democrats took control of the House, compelling him to share power for the first time.
Trump yielded on the shutdown Jan. 25 after public opinion turned against him and congressional Republicans. He'd won not a nickel of the $5.7 billion he'd demanded for the wall but had caused missed paychecks for legions of federal workers and contractors and lost government services for countless others. It was seen as a political fiasco for Trump and an early triumph for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.
The fight left both parties dead set against another shutdown. That sentiment weakened Trump's hand and fueled the bipartisan deal, a pact that has contrasted with the parties' still-raging differences over health care, taxes and investigations of the president.
Notably, the word "wall" — which fueled many a chant at Trump campaign events and then his rallies as president — does not appear once in the 1,768 pages of legislation and explanatory materials. "Barriers" and "fencing" are the nouns of choice.
The compromise also would squeeze funding for Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, in an attempt to pressure the agency to detain fewer immigrants gradually. To the dismay of Democrats, it would still leave an agency many of them consider abusive holding thousands more immigrants than it did last year.
The measure contains money for improved surveillance equipment, more customs agents and humanitarian aid for detained immigrants. The overall bill also provides $330 billion to finance dozens of federal programs for the rest of the year, one-fourth of federal agency budgets.
Trump has talked for weeks about augmenting the agreement by taking executive action to divert money from other programs for wall construction, without congressional sign-off.
Those moves could prompt congressional resistance or lawsuits, but would help assuage supporters dismayed that the president may be yielding.
Article is LOCKED by author/seeder
Tags
Who is online
125 visitors
Keep the government open, declare an emergency, let the Courts handle it and DECLARE VICTORY!
Amen.
Hahaha! A can of worms.....Pandora's box....the Trojan horse are all about to be opened.
Sign the emergency act, declare your victory, build your wall, screw the economy, and then clutch them pearls when a Dem gets elected.
You ain't gonna like it and the precedent will already be set.
Other Presidents have declared an emergency. Allocating funds may be the problem and if the Court says the President can't do it - there won't be a precedent/ or one that defines what a President can do. The main thing is that Trump has shown he did everything he could to build the wall and the dems blocked him. His supporters will be satisfied
He's been in office 2 yrs, why is this an emergency NOW....why didn't he do this when he first came into office.
Yes they have, and none as questionable as this.
So, are you saying this is as much of a political stunt as it is a true declaration?
It is a well calculated political move. One that satisfies his base. I don't expect the Court to allow him to move the money around. That is a good thing in case we have another radical in the White House.
And who knows, maybe the Cruz idea will pan out IE: All of El Chapo's money will be confiscated and used for a wall. That should be about $100 Billion.
Healthcare funding? National emergency!
Planned parenthood funding? National emergency!
Green New Deal? National emergency!
This'll be fun...
Repubs must not allow Pres Obama to subvert the Constitution of the U.S. For his own benefit & because he is unable to negotiate w/ Congress . "
Signed, Donald J. Trump 11/20/2014
The relevant law authorizes him to move money in the case of an emergency (and the law gives the President the power to declare the emergency).
Not if the Court says it is beyond executive authority!
Repubs must not allow Pres Obama to subvert the Constitution of the U.S. For his own benefit
Ah, but they did.
We will soon find out, we will be hearing from the 9th Circuit as soon as he makes the announcement.
And it's going to be a ginormous mistake on the right's part.
Ohhhhh, but no.
Wanna watch the right and the NRA explode simultaneously?
How many deaths have been caused by semi-automatic firearms?
The 2nd amendment would still be standing because one could still own a single shot gun. But the semis? Hmmmm.
Hellooooooo Pandora!
we will be hearing from the 9th Circuit as soon as he makes the announcement
No doubt. Justice by forum shopping.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/33/2293
Congress gave him the power to declare national emergencies (I think there a couple dozen "national emergencies" at the moment) and the power to reallocate military funding to meet the emergency.
Obama declared 12 emergencies in his two terms. I am not sure what he can do, but I am sure he will be challenged on it. As I say, he did all he could.
Way to go to show the comprehension skills! You missed the whole mark.
Where is it?
Do you just maybe...maybe understand that "semi-automatic firearms" might include handguns?
The optimal word being semi-automatic.
Derp...
Where is what? El Chapo's money?
Both Bush and Obama increased executive power ... none of them ever bother thinking about what that means when the other party is in charge, which eventually DOES happen. Filibuster rules and such as well ... slippery slope for all.
But if Trump's base starts thinking about what this would mean when the Dems are back in charge and there is another mass shooting, they might not support it. Hell, McConnell said he was against it ... and then he suddenly rolled over.
For most people, it won't take a cream candidate to be a better option than Trump. Hell, Vic would be a better option than Trump, and he and I don't agree on much.
He's been saying there was a Border Problem since running for President.
The question you should really ask is...…"Why hasn't the border problem been solved waaaaaaay before Trump" ?
OR
"Why do Democrats say …. The border is not a problem NOW ……. after they did" !
Derp.....
Too bad that's not how the narrative goes in "Liberal (illuminate ALL guns) Land" !
Why do we never seem to be told "What gun is used" as an "IMPORTANCE", in all those Chicago Murders" that go on …. year, after year, after year, after year...…
Two years is still far better than his predecessor who do did next to nothing about it in 8 years...
Do something about what? A problem that is fixing itself?
3 Charts That Show What's Actually Happening Along The Southern Border
But NOW it's an emergency? Not 19 years ago???
Whatever the fuck that meant....
Are you having issue with what type of gun is reported to be used or were you just trying to find a way of working Chicago in there as some discussion weapon...either way it really showed what mentality was in play on that comment.
And why would Liberals want to illuminate a gun?
DERRRRRRP
I know.....right ?
"Are you having issue with what type of gun is reported"
Liberal types "Use the Gun Type"....when they need to for an agenda.....wouldn't you say ?
"And why would Liberals want to illuminate a gun?"
illuminate verb
il·lu·mi·nate | \ i-ˈlü-mə-ˌnāt
transitive verb
2a: to make clear
Just admit you misspelled "eliminate". That's on you, not Studius. "Illuminate" doesn't work in your sentence, no matter how hard you pin your own error on him.
You have a need for me to admit to something I DIDN'T do ?
I meant EXACTLY what I posted.
Get over it !
So, liberals want to make all guns clear?
That statement needs illumination.
Ever heard of a "spot light" ?
Ever heard of what a "Spot Light" is used for ?
"put a spotlight on (someone or something)
To focus on or bring attention to someone or something. "
To "Illuminate" !
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."
Albert Einstein
Soooo. Let me get this straight...he duped his base in to thinking he can do an end run around congress, he and you both admit it won't work, but he does it anyway to further dupe his base.
Do you really wonder why the intelligence of his base is a running joke?
Hahaha! You're the only one standing there looking foolish for writing that and then trying to twist it.
How did it go in your comment?
Oh yeah....DERP.
The key misleading word in that chart is "apprehensions". That does not even begin to show total number of people crossing illegally that do not get get caught! Talk to any CBP agent actively working the border and he/she will tell you the same.
I twisted NOTHING.
I even gave GREAT examples for the why I did what I did, to the "Questionable" ones !
Who is trying twist again ?
Derp...………….
Just realized why some right wingers use so many emoji's....
Harder to screw up the spelling.
The CBP folks in my neighborhood say the ratio is 3:1 - for every one caught/apprehended/turned themselves in, three don't and are merrily making their way North and into the Mid-west.
Because Left Wingers don't understand the Written word ?
We do when it's used correctly. When near-homophones are confused by the writer, well, that's on the writer.
Like I said......lol
Trump sure nailed his base down.
That pretty much jives with the way it is down here in Southern Arizona and New Mexico. Some people that live nowhere near the borfer just refuse to accept that our Southern border has more holes in it than a pasta strainer...
Well played, sir or madam!
"Liberal (illuminate ALL guns) Land"
So you meant "Liberal (spot light ALL guns) Land"? Really? That's what you're going with to cover a simple spelling error? Have you embraced Trumpism so completely that, like the moron-in-Chief, you can't admit to making any mistake and will go to any lengths to pretend you're infallible?
I meant "ore".
That probably depends on how successful the gold-digging is. Or sex-essful, if you will.
Google Antelope Wells - on average, 800 Illegal Aliens "turn themselves in" to the CPB WEEKLY. And, the BP says that there are easily twice or three times that amount who just keep on truckin'. So, we're looking at at least 2,400 Illegal Aliens coming through Antelope Wells WEEKLY .
And that's just one "Open Border" hole in the fence.
Around 9:30 p.m. Thursday, January 17, 2019, a second large group of illegal aliens was encountered by Border Patrol agents working at Camp Bounds Forward Operating Base at Antelope Wells. Antelope Wells is located 98 miles southwest of Deming, NM.
As before, this group was comprised primarily of Central American families and unaccompanied juveniles. Fifteen families were reported to have requested medical attention shortly after apprehension.
This is an ongoing situation that Border Patrol agents face in southern New Mexico. Hundreds of parents and children are being encountered by agents after having faced a treacherous journey in the hands of dangerous smugglers.
This is the 25th large group consisting of over 100 people since the beginning of the fiscal year in this area alone.
In the Border Patrol’s El Paso Sector, which includes New Mexico and far West Texas, more than 24,000 migrants were arrested for illegally crossing the border between Oct. 1, the beginning of the government’s fiscal year, and Christmas. That compares with 4,849 between October and December 2017.
Hmmmm - 20,000 more in a year's time - yup - no border crises.
In Antelope Wells, there isn’t the fencing or manpower to prevent crossings and migrants requesting asylum begin the process in a matter of hours. The U.S. military hasn’t hardened security here, as it has at other border crossings .
Aaron Hull, the El Paso Sector’s chief patrol agent, said the dramatic rise in illegal crossings at Antelope Wells takes all the attention of his small staff there and limits their ability to patrol for drug smugglers and other criminals.
“It’s still a border security situation,” said Mr. Hull. “We don’t know who is in the group.”
Making the problem more pronounced are the late-night arrivals and sheer remoteness of the area, nearly 90 miles from the nearest station where migrants can complete the asylum-request process and be temporarily jailed. Most families are then released to await a hearing on their claim, which can take years.
Migrants have to wait for hours in Antelope Wells outside or in a garage for buses to transport them, during which agents enter their information on spreadsheets and conduct health inspections.
I think you are onto something here. El Chapo brought a lot of drugs into the US. The leader of the Mexican Sinaloa cartel is worth around $1 billion. He was tried here and if we did that, then we should be able to freeze all of his assets and then confiscate them. Put that money towards the wall.
Yup, The perfect solution!
Wasn't that almost the same douche comment we saw about the Dems taking Congress?
What ever that first incoherent sentence was..were you writing in covfefenese?
And your answer is because of the two of us, I'm the one that can and will back up my comments AND I don't disapper when either rebutting or commenting and asked to provide proof.
Yes.
The methodology for coming up with ANY amount seems to be guesswork at best.
Can we put our hands on ant remaining property or cash in Mexico?
Nope.
It's a pipe dream, at best.
Was he then negligent in not declaring an emergency earlier? I mean, he's been in office for a while now. If this is an emergency, he's been negligent and incompetent (not that we didn't already know that). Or it wasn't really an emergency to start with, and you're supporting the demolition of checks and balances.
Sandy, as he himself said - he was going to try every way before taking that last step to an emergency declaration. He did as he said he would.
You don't do that if it's an actual emergency, Vic.
It's a matter of opinion. Who gets to define it that way?
Congressional Republicans who have represented agricultural interests for the past 40 years?
Or
Congressional democrats who only see the benefits of the illegals streaming over the border?
Or
The people who live on the border?
Or
American entry level workers impacted by the illegal immigration?
Or
The American taxpayer?
It's in the eye of the beholder isn't it?
7 Presidents over 39 years have declared a national emergency over the Iranian takeover of the american embassy. According to Congress, "Emergency" is up to the President to define.
The problem is that some don't think this President has any rights and they still have way too much power
The 1975 law is specifically set up to give POTUS an excuse to not be delayed by needlessly long Congressional debates and procedures.
There is no evidence of that, especially from the 2 years the GOP controlled all three branches of government.
Especially when President Trump did not sign the December CR by the GOP controlled Congress that would have given him his 5 billion.
His case is weak.
Did it start recently? Did he have a Congress that opposed him for the last two years?
No to both.
This is all politics. No emergencies.
If it is weak, it will be rejected. It will have to be considered on other legal issues as well.
You mean like the owner of Mar-a-Lago?
Trump business empire shuns E-Verify, hires illegal immigrants
Well.
But.
Um.
Obama, Hillary, football players kneeling, Muslims, squirrel!
Benghazzi !!!!!
Her emails!
He just admitted that he didn't have to do this, that he has plenty of funding already,
and could continue to build/replace a little bit at a time while continuing to collect more funds in the future.
He said he doesn't want to wait.......so he's willing to force the issue.
That's not how Congress works.
Both women stated that they INTENTIONALLY and DELIBERATELY bought FALSE documentation while in NJ - and that's Trump's fault???
None of the Presidential campaigners had/have signed up for E-Verify also - gonna go after them?
I can't say it enough times, all of that including the legally important issue of whether he can use the money he intends to use will be up to the courts. The ACLU already announced the will file.
I do recall Obama finding money to pay insurance companies to supplement their losses with Obamacare. He also had found lots of money for Iran to release some hostages. Of course, Obama did it all quietly, Trump could never get away with that could he? Somebody would leak it and Adam Schiff would be telling the media "We intend to find out what he intended to really, really, really do with that money"!
Really? Just a few years ago Democrats on this very site were saying Congresses refusal to act as the President justified the President not enforcing immigration laws. One could get whiplash following many liberals position on executive power. That, of course, was a much more dangerous violation of the separation of powers than a President exercising his power to act pursuant to a law passed by Congress.
Sadly, I think you are wasting your time with many. Your statement is 100% accurate, but they've bought into a narrative in which reality plays no part. The President is claiming Congress delegated him the power to declare an emergency and to reprioritize funding to build a wall. He has a very strong case the laws passed by Congress allow him to do it. The court will either agree or not. The only "problem" would arise is if he ignored the Court.
Congress can, of course, revoke the law he's relying on or change it to stop the construction process. Congress can assert itself as a co-equal branch at any time and stop the construction. It's a badly written law that delegates too much power to the Executive, but until Congress revokes it, it really has no grounds to complain when the President acts with the power Congress gave him.
Sadly, too many liberals have been infected with the hysteria peddled by the media. They are to busy seeing Nazis on every street corner or behind every smile to realize this is how government works. The President asserts he has the power to do something, someone objects and the Court will ultimately rule on the issue one way or the other. It's routine.
But instead of informing themselves, many lash out like dumb animals lacking the capacity to reason. It seems like they are having a contest to see who can come up with the most hysterical overreaction.
I am sure they will take it on since it involves a conflict between two branches of the government. Right now the Supremes have their hands full trying to decide if a question regarding citizenship can be included in the 2020 Census. I predict a 5-4 verdict in April for including the essential question. Oh you mean if he ignored the Court! There is no worry there. The idea is to prove to his supporters that he took it all the way. After the ruling he will abide by it
but until Congress revokes it, it really has no grounds to complain when the President acts with the power Congress gave him.
Yup, the next move belongs to Pelosi. (and the ACLU)
Sadly, too many liberals have been infected with the hysteria peddled by the media.
It is strictly a matter of denying the President his key campaign promise. That is their purpose
Sure he can....but then again he made it clear it wasn't an emergency. His base is going to love that he torpedoed his own declaration.
If it were truly an emergency, his own words just negated that.
“I could do the wall over a longer period of time,” he said. “I didn’t need to do this, but I’d rather do it much faster.”
How does one individual shoot himself in the foot so many times and not even limp.
The best end might just be the SCOTUS ruling against him. Then no future President gets to try it. In the meantime he gets to tell his supporters he went the extra mile over this issue that congress never would fix
Haha...doesn't work that way...clutch your pearls.
This "emergency" is all for his bruised ego. Nice dictator move
It's a win
NO it's not, it's all for his ego and vanity.
It's all that matters?
If he gets this through, it's going to backfire so badly and the crying will be loud from the right.
When dealing with the left, it's essential
He's doing it for vanity, that is all
He's doing it because he's terrified of Coulter and Limbaugh saying mean things about him again. That's the only reason.
The total number of family unit aliens (FMUA) apprehended in between the ports of entry and deemed inadmissible at the ports of entry: 31,901
The total number of unaccompanied children apprehended in between the ports of entry and deemed inadmissible at the ports of entry: 5,121
The total number of single adults apprehended in between the ports of entry and deemed inadmissible at the ports of entry: 23,682
Yup, that sure sounds like an emergency to me
Only in your mind. He's going to be bitch slapped yet again.
Only in your mind....
The president swears to uphold the Constitution of the United States of America. Declaring a State of Emergency where there is none flies in the face of the Constitution. Congress controls spending money not the president. The president can request, but not demand funding. Many authorities have said that this "crisis" on the Mexican border is fabricated. There have been countless contradictions to the claims of how undocumented immigrants enter the country, the main avenues drugs are entering the country and just how many "bad" people are crossing the border. Make no mistake this is about one thing and one thing only and that is Trump getting his way. Why he picked this one campaign promise to fixate on and not something like our ageing infrastructure we will never know.
You better prepare yourself for the 2020 election.
Hum.......Were the Japanese Americans living on the west coast after Pearl Harbor a crisis? Ask FDR
Was DACA legal? Obama told us NO three times and then just before the 2012 election he did it Ask Obama
Oh yeah! This seed is a keeper to reference later.
Simple. To increase their voter base...
Illegal immigration is at it's lowest rate since 2000 through 2004.
Both Bush and Obama enacted many measures without a declaration of a NE.
The emergency is a subjective partisan football.
Reality TV at it's finest. All drama, no substance.
And where do you live???
Even if it were true, that never was a valid argument. I have submitted the numbers from the DHS above. It would be like saying crime is down so lets lay off cops.
Both Bush and Obama enacted many measures without a declaration of a NE.
Measures that would be rejected by the "open borders" democratic party of today.
The emergency is a subjective partisan football.
In your opinion
I'll wait with you for that answer
Really? Can you link to that portion of the DNC's platform?
Well, we could have chosen Nazis and bigots but...they bought red hats instead.
What's that got to do with anything?? That just showed everyone on NT that you don't live anywhere near the SW border of the U. S. and it also shows you're not really current on the news from this section of the U. S.
But, you did get to throw your childish Presidential title out for all to see, right?
The first lawsuit has been filed and it's from a group of landowners on the border in Texas.
Something interesting was said in the interview with one of the landowners...That people still haven't been paid from the last ED in Texas...That was 10 plus years ago.
What I have been able to find with a quick search is that even getting a fair market price from the government is a real battle. Getting paid at all is another problem all together.
If it was an emergency, why does he golf so many times at such an expense to all of us?
Why did he install a new golf simulator in the WH for $50K of his "own" money?
I'm guessing it was just one more thing of Obama's that he wanted to replace.......
or is it just more " executive time " ?
The most important thing he replaced was Obama himself
Damn good question for the last president. You can add in his shoot arounds with college basketball teams. And his never ending fund raising stops.
It's his own money. WTF. Would you prefer he pull an Obama and have tax payers pay for it?
Again, using his own money. Who really cares? I am more concerned that we paid for a golf simulator for Obama. He wasn't exactly hurting for money.
Put it under perks of the office; which are increasing with each passing President.
Yeah, WTF. There are tens of millions of dollars unaccounted for from the Inaugural Committee. That's why I bracketed "own".
Donald's history of commingling "his" funds with The Trump Foundation, is not good.
Compare that with the number of times Trump golfs, his vacations, his never ending rallies ... and you'll find that Trump far exceeds Obama in these areas.
How 'bout showing some proof of that assertion.
This country still has 31 of 58 ongoing "National Emergencies" !
Trump has …... 3 of those ..... to date ?
The world will end ….WHEN again ?
The interesting thing is that Trump himself, in announcing this, said "I didn't need to do this."
And he would be absolutely correct if he didn't have to work with the Democratic children in Congress.
Mike Lee, who would make a fine Supreme Court justice, has a very sensible take.
My initial assessment is that what Pres. Trump announced is legal. Whether or not it should be legal is a different matter. Congress has been ceding far too much power to the exec. branch for decades. We should use this moment as an opportunity to start taking that power back.
— Mike Lee (@SenMikeLee) February 15, 2019
Thanks to everybody for keeping this a civil conversation.
The issue seems to be decided. I hate to sound like the late Harry Caray, but "TRUMP WINS, TRUMP WINS!"