Pelosi Rejects Trump’s DACA Proposal - Page 10

Wrong. Under Senate rules the Majority Leader can table any amendments or block amendments all together.

Your very source cites:

.

Follow by

This is the usual theme with this admin. What they say they want will eventually be contradicted by something they say or do later on.

This is how funding usually works. Its x dollars over y number of years. Dems or repubs don't like to cut projects once a shit ton of projects get contracts signed and the pork gets brought into people's districts.

25 billion in one shot isn't in the realm of possibility as projects don't have costs all front loaded and appropriated in the first year.

Trump spiked the best deal he was ever going to get. He had all the leverage with a house and senate majority and he couldn't pull it together.

Yes they will say one thing today and say another thing tomorrow, that isn’t the argument. But if you read the article there is a big difference in authorizations and immediately appropriating the funds.

An authorization could have easily been taken away once the Democrats won back the House or the Senate, as in immediately appropriating the funds Trump would have received something that would have been guaranteed.

Why would Trump give us full on citizenship for something that the Democrats could of take away once they won’t back either the House or the Senate in 2018?

Negotiating wise would have made no sense for him and he would have been the biggest loser by now. He would have received $1.6 billion in exchange for 800k citizenship for dreamers. Can you imagine the backlash from his base. This was no brainer for him to turn this deal down.

Because it doesn't matter to Trump. It doesn't matter if it's one lump sum, or spread out over 10 years. It doesn't matter, he just wants to say "I built the wall". He just got push back from Fox and the conservative loud mouths and he freaked out.

I'm very aware of the difference, and I've already pointed out that the admin requested immediate funds as well as future authorizations, only to 180 on it once schumer agreed to 25B.

Easily taken away? No. That's plainly not true. That logic only makes sense if Rs were convinced that they would be losing enough seats to not be able to buckle dem's attempt at taking away border security funding. Rs very much had confidence in keeping the senate, especially that time last year. Their fears were correctly on the house and that isn't enough to make dems do what you're claiming they would have done.

Trump already looks like a loser with this ludicrously long shutdown and with nothing to show for it other than 800k americans hurting for it. A shutdown that started before the year ended no less.

Hes a dimwit who manages to get cornered in an oval office.

There is no getting around it, Trump turned his back on the best deal he was going to get when he had leverage. Now his leverage is the shutdown and dems would be right to not reward him on this.

The admin also said that millions worth of drugs go through at the Southern border. They fail to mention that the large majority of drugs go through ports of entry where wall money would be of no use. The admin also said that thousands of terrorists come to the U.S. from the South. They fail to mention that the terrorists are coming on plane where wall money would be of no use.

The admin plays with the numbers. Your source said that Schummer offered Trump a "significant" amount of money above 1.6B. What was that number? We don't know, and there's no way to verify it because only of handful of people were in the room all of which will say something different.

Now, Democrats keep mentioning this 25B number, though not all of it was appropriated for the first year. Republicans will cite the 1.6B, even though they were offered a "significant" amount more.

They're politicians, and they all bend the truth.

Edit: to clarify about the "significant" amount of money offered above 1.6B (available for immediate use)

If Congress authorizes but doesn’t appropriate funds, Democrats could conceivably withhold them if they won control of one or both chambers of Congress in November. The Democratic aide told me Schumer agreed to a “significant” immediate appropriation above the $1.6 billion the administration initially requested last spring, with the rest authorized over several years.

Indeed. D's played on Trumps terms. If appropriation was that large of a concern, why the initial ask for it in the first place? It plays out like amateurs are negotiating (which is accurate). They're not going about this in a measured way.

Damn. This is disappointing

Damn. This is disappointing

lmao right! i'm glad pelosi shot it down. permanent solution or bust