The Jury Talks Back

9/13/2017

Good News: Trump Has Negotiated with Democrats and Agreed to Amnesty in Return for No Wall

Filed under: Uncategorized — Patterico @ 7:14 pm

Congratulations, Republicans! At dinner, your president has agreed with Democrat leaders to a new amnesty, in exchange for “a package of border security, excluding the wall”:

I am not opposed to some sort of legislative solution to the DREAMers issue. I just thought Trump had promised something about a wall. I might have DREAMed it though.

UPDATE: New York Times:

But the bipartisan comity appeared to have its limits. In a tweet, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, the White House press secretary, disputed the Democrats’ characterization of Mr. Trump’s stance on the border wall. “While DACA and border security were both discussed, excluding the wall was certainly not agreed to,” she wrote.

Mr. Schumer’s communications director, Matt House, fired back on Twitter: “The President made clear he would continue pushing the wall, just not as part of this agreement.”

This does not seem inconsistent with Pelosi’s claim. Nobody is saying they agreed there will never be a wall. It’s just that wall funding is not part of the agreement. Trump will have to get the wall funding when Democrats want something and he has a chance to negotiate and make a deal.

Wait — wasn’t that what this was?

UPDATE x2: In case anyone thinks this is “fake news” listen to Trump himself: “The wall will come later.”

It is what it is.

10 Comments »

  1. UPDATE: New York Times:

    But the bipartisan comity appeared to have its limits. In a tweet, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, the White House press secretary, disputed the Democrats’ characterization of Mr. Trump’s stance on the border wall. “While DACA and border security were both discussed, excluding the wall was certainly not agreed to,” she wrote.

    Mr. Schumer’s communications director, Matt House, fired back on Twitter: “The President made clear he would continue pushing the wall, just not as part of this agreement.”

    This does not seem inconsistent with Pelosi’s claim. Nobody is saying they agreed there will never be a wall. It’s just that wall funding is not part of the agreement. Trump will have to get the wall funding when Democrats want something and he has a chance to negotiate and make a deal.

    Wait — wasn’t that what this was?

    Comment by Patterico — 9/13/2017 @ 7:46 pm

  2. NBC reports:

    Sources told NBC News that Schumer and Pelosi told Trump they are prepared to deliver votes on a measure that would pair the existing DREAM Act bill text with additional border security that does not include the border wall funding. Specifics on what type and level of border security were not disclosed.

    If the additional border security is e-verify plus quadrupling the size of the border patrol and ICE, then I would grudgingly support a delay in further funding for the wall.

    Comment by Andrew — 9/13/2017 @ 8:45 pm

  3. Andrew, really? You’ll be okay with increasing security that the next Democratic president can simply roll back instead of using the leverage the Republicans have to get the wall for DACA? What sort of crap deals is the greatest deal maker doing? This isn’t chess, it’s surrender for the sake of getting something done. Forget the hard work, the negotiations, lets just give the left what they want to be popular again. What a fighter, what winning. Give me a break.

    Comment by Sean — 9/14/2017 @ 5:48 am

  4. Well, since this morning Trump is denying any DACA deal, one of two things happened:

    1) No deal was reached, but the media reported one anyway, either because they are lying, or were lied to, and couldn’t wait to verify before running with it.

    2) A deal was reached, but Trump is lying about it now and going back on it.

    Either one seems perfectly in character to me, for all the characters involved.

    Comment by Frederick — 9/14/2017 @ 6:00 am

  5. UPDATE x2: In case anyone thinks this is “fake news” listen to Trump himself: “The wall will come later.”

    It is what it is.

    Comment by Patterico — 9/14/2017 @ 6:12 am

  6. Ryan and McConnell on board. So, Republicans have reached a “deal” too, it seems.

    Comment by Frederick — 9/14/2017 @ 6:21 am

  7. Sean, if you want future presidents and congresses to oppose open borders then you’ll need a constitutional amendment. Otherwise, they can do it if they want, regardless of whether a wall will have been built.

    Comment by Andrew — 9/14/2017 @ 7:11 am

  8. Andrew, I’m not supporting anything here, I’m simply pointing out that those that will “grudgingly” accept further delays in more permanent border security measures in exchange for temporary, executive orders are simply continuing the same game the politicians-mainly Democrats-play each time this topic is discussed. It’s the Wimpy principle, a little amnesty now for border security later. This is the same mentality that Trump savaged his primary opponents over to the point of openly mocking them for supporting such a deal. Now, everyone seems to be okay with this a year later. That, is what I’m pointing out.

    But, so what, nothing we can do about that now, Trump is President.

    Comment by Sean — 9/14/2017 @ 7:54 am

  9. I waiting for the first Trump supporter to spin this as “Trump got something Obama couldn’t get passed.”

    Any bets on who?

    Comment by SPQR — 9/14/2017 @ 8:16 am

  10. Sure, executive orders are a lot weaker than statutes. But my understanding is that the “additional border security” that Trump wants in return for DACA would come in statutory form. By the way, there are many possible versions of DACA itself, so I hope it is carefully limited to only the most compelling cases that the vast majority of Americans would support.

    Comment by Andrew — 9/14/2017 @ 8:17 am

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

Comment moderation is enabled. Your comment may take some time to appear.

Live Preview


Powered by WordPress.