The Briefing Room
General Category => Politics/Government => Topic started by: mystery-ak on January 15, 2019, 03:10:11 pm
-
'Gang of 20' emerges in Senate to push for a border wall deal
by Susan Ferrechio
| January 15, 2019 12:00 AM
Senate lawmakers have formed a new bipartisan “gang†to try to resolve the impasse over border wall funding that has caused the longest government shutdown in history.
The group includes 20 Senate lawmakers — 10 Republicans and 10 Democrats — according to Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas. Cornyn is not in the gang but is a member of the GOP leadership team and has been briefed on the discussions so far.
“My hypothesis is when federal employees start missing their paychecks, that changes the picture,†Cornyn said. “A lot more Senate Democrats are under pressure. If people start breaking off, maybe there is a chance to end the impasse.â€
Cornyn said he also talked to “a senior Senate Democrat about some ideas of what we could do,†but he added a proposal would ultimately have to meet President Trump’s demand for border wall funding, which Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., have so far refused.
“Iâ€m glad they are talking, but no real progress yet, other than talking,†Cornyn said, referring to the gang.
It's been nearly six years since the Gang of Eight organized an immigration bill that envisioned a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants in exchange for tougher border security measures and language aimed at ensuring immigrants don't overstay their visas. The Gang of Eight bill passed in a 68-32 vote in the Senate, but it was never taken up in the Republican-led House.
The new "gang" consists of 20 percent of the Senate and is hoping to find some kind of answer on immigration that allows the government shutdown to end. Getting there will likely involve some agreement to fund a border wall, a demand of President Trump's, and some kind of tradeoff that Democrats can support.
more
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/congress/gang-of-20-emerges-in-senate-to-push-for-a-border-wall-deal (https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/congress/gang-of-20-emerges-in-senate-to-push-for-a-border-wall-deal)
-
That folks is Lindsey Graham undermining the President. And more importantly undermining the will of the people when they voted for border control.
It seems that even Trumps close friends are against him. Isn't that rich. For two years here I have been slammed for not supporting everything Trump says or does. Truth is that it is his closest friends and appointments that undermine him. I guess they aren't never Trumpers though. Just sometime Trumpers with their own agenda.
Lindsey Graham. Wanna be President.
And all that Lindsey Graham is doing is giving ammunition to the liberals who take it and say Republicans willing but Trump isn't. Amnesty has always been his fight and he wants it.
-
Cornyn better not join this gang.
-
That folks is Lindsey Graham undermining the President. And more importantly undermining the will of the people when they voted for border control.
It seems that even Trumps close friends are against him. Isn't that rich. For two years here I have been slammed for not supporting everything Trump says or does. Truth is that it is his closest friends and appointments that undermine him. I guess they aren't never Trumpers though. Just sometime Trumpers with their own agenda.
Lindsey Graham. Wanna be President.
There are no "friends" to be had in the DC swamp.
-
There are no "friends" to be had in the DC swamp.
No, but Trump has been a bad judge of character more than once. He should have surrounded himself with people who agree with his platform. Its been evident more than once. Bad Character judgment.
-
Cornyn better not join this gang.
Sounds like he's working with them.
-
No, but Trump has been a bad judge of character more than once. He should have surrounded himself with people who agree with his platform. Its been evident more than once. Bad Character judgment.
I completely understand that it looks to be the case, however, I don't believe that he (nor any other in his place) has much of a choice in selecting and placing people in any positions that require confirmation. As far as the actors in the House and Senate, the best that can be done is to seek some kind of "bargain" with them for a level of temporary "support."
-
The Establishment loves open borders. That's why they hate Trump.
-
Gangsters.
-
The article doesn't name names and it only reports 10 DEMS and 10 GOP. I want to know ALL the names as it would prove most interesting ... RUBIO backpedaled quite a bit when he was running for the presidency ... my hunch is he's at it again.
-
That folks is Lindsey Graham undermining the President. And more importantly undermining the will of the people when they voted for border control.
It seems that even Trumps close friends are against him. Isn't that rich. For two years here I have been slammed for not supporting everything Trump says or does. Truth is that it is his closest friends and appointments that undermine him. I guess they aren't never Trumpers though. Just sometime Trumpers with their own agenda.
Lindsey Graham. Wanna be President.
And all that Lindsey Graham is doing is giving ammunition to the liberals who take it and say Republicans willing but Trump isn't. Amnesty has always been his fight and he wants it.
I agree with you; this will only give the DEMS ammunition. You know darn well that the DEMS will want some form of amnesty, DACA, and continued birthright citizenship, etc., etc.
That is why I made the comment in another thread; I am not confident in this GOP Senate. This is exactly why. Trump is proclaiming that the GOP is standing united and then the GOP turns around and agrees to a 'Gang'.
-
The article doesn't name names and it only reports 10 DEMS and 10 GOP. I want to know ALL the names as it would prove most interesting ... RUBIO backpedaled quite a bit when he was running for the presidency ... my hunch is he's at it again.
that backpedaling by Marco cust him any chance to ever be the nominee. Thank God he showed his true colors.
-
Sounds like he's working with them.
This 'gang' totally misunderstands the mindset of 'that gang', i.e. the Pelosi/Schumer gang.
They will not give Trump the wall because they are rightly convinced that it would solidify his standing with his base and make him almost impossible to beat in 2020.
So, no, we cannot give them an inch.
-
Border security for Dreamers. That's the fair deal that should be able to break the impasse. The question is - do either the Dems or Trump want to break the impasse? They are each pandering to their respective bases, who each view the other side as having evil motives.
-
That folks is Lindsey Graham undermining the President.
Bullshit. This is Lindsay Graham trying to save the President's arse. The outlines of a fair deal are there for anyone with eyes to see. But not everyone is willing to open their eyes.
-
Bullshit. This is Lindsay Graham trying to save the President's arse. The outlines of a fair deal are there for anyone with eyes to see. But not everyone is willing to open their eyes.
You have way too much faith in the reasonableness of the democrats. It does not exist. Open your own eyes.
-
Bullshit. This is Lindsay Graham trying to save the President's arse. The outlines of a fair deal are there for anyone with eyes to see. But not everyone is willing to open their eyes.
By working with openly duplicitous democrats? How does that work?
-
I'm not a fan of "gangs" in the Senate, and my jury is out on this one until I see the list of 20. If it's the usual batch of RINOs that are always forming gangs as a way to force compromise with Rats (against the wishes of conservatives) then I'm against this one.
-
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/425333-senators-restart-shutdown-talks-and-quickly-hit-roadblocks
A bipartisan group of senators met on Monday night to search for a way out of the partial government shutdown, but made no visible progress toward breaking the weeks-long stalemate....
...Kaine and Coons are two of more than a dozen senators who met in Sen. Joe Manchin's (D-W.Va.) Capitol hideaway off a low-ceilinged basement hallway to hunt for a way out of the partial shutdown, which is currently on its 24th day.
In addition to Kaine, Coons and Manchin, Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine), Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), Doug Jones (D-Ala.), Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), Rob Portman (R-Ohio), Mark Warner (D-Va.), Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.), Cory Gardner (R-Colo.), Ben Cardin (D-Md.), Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) and Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) took part in the meeting....
-
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/425333-senators-restart-shutdown-talks-and-quickly-hit-roadblocks
A bipartisan group of senators met on Monday night to search for a way out of the partial government shutdown, but made no visible progress toward breaking the weeks-long stalemate....
...Kaine and Coons are two of more than a dozen senators who met in Sen. Joe Manchin's (D-W.Va.) Capitol hideaway off a low-ceilinged basement hallway to hunt for a way out of the partial shutdown, which is currently on its 24th day.
In addition to Kaine, Coons and Manchin, Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine), Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), Doug Jones (D-Ala.), Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), Rob Portman (R-Ohio), Mark Warner (D-Va.), Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.), Cory Gardner (R-Colo.), Ben Cardin (D-Md.), Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) and Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) took part in the meeting....
Well, then. If anyone here thought this was a good idea, this should correct that mistake.
-
You have way too much faith in the reasonableness of the democrats. It does not exist. Open your own eyes.
The goal is an equitable compromise. We get what we need - real funding for border security - and they get something that's of interest to their coalition. That's what a compromise is. Now I understand that folks on both sides may simply be unwilling to compromise or even bargain - that sometimes happens when one is convinced of the other side's mendacity - but public policy has been advanced for centuries by means of horse-trading.
I am not suggesting that conservatives compromise the issue of border security - far from it, for our sovereignty as a nation depends on it. But to get the needed money, I have absolutely no objection to, for example, normalizing the status of the "Dreamers". That's good policy, just as border security is good policy. There's an opportunity for a win-win for both sides, if only we could return to the days when we didn't reflexively hate each other.
-
I'm not a fan of "gangs" in the Senate, and my jury is out on this one until I see the list of 20. If it's the usual batch of RINOs that are always forming gangs as a way to force compromise with Rats (against the wishes of conservatives) then I'm against this one.
So long as the compromise includes the money the President needs for border security, what's wrong with that?
-
So long as the compromise includes the money the President needs for border security, what's wrong with that?
I'll tell you what's wrong: Anybody willing to compromise without knowing what the other side wants is a fool. Wait...a damned fool.
Until I know who this gang is, it's no deal as far as I'm concerned.
-
Well, then. If anyone here thought this was a good idea, this should correct that mistake.
Yup. The squishiest of the squishes.
No deal, @Jazzhead
-
Yup. The squishiest of the squishes.
No deal, @Jazzhead
There's no deal without Trump's agreement.
-
I'll tell you what's wrong: Anybody willing to compromise without knowing what the other side wants is a fool.
Right now, the radical Dems and Republicans are unwilling to even discuss compromise, so the issue of what could be a fair deal is being discussed among both parties' "squishes" . But my point is that some compromise is appropriate in order to get the money needed for border security. Assuming, of course, that that's still your goal.
Normalizing the Dreamers is a small price to pay for effective border security.
-
Right now, the radical Dems and Republicans are unwilling to even discuss compromise, so the issue of what could be a fair deal is being discussed among both parties' "squishes" . But my point is that some compromise is appropriate in order to get the money needed for border security. Assuming, of course, that that's still your goal.
Normalizing the Dreamers is a small price to pay for effective border security.
I don't know if that is the price, and unless you're one of the "gang," you don't either.
-
So long as the compromise includes the money the President needs for border security, what's wrong with that?
It depends upon what it costs.
-
There's no deal without Trump's agreement.
Yes there is... They can go around him.
-
Yes there is... They can go around him.
And, he's got some options.
-
It seems that even Trumps close friends are against him.
A real friend would have persuaded him not to hire Paul Manfort and Reince Priebus.
-
And, he's got some options.
Not in the face of an override. He can sit and take it, or declare a national emergency, or my favorite, declare war on Mexico... which, btw, is every bit as calamitous as declaring the emergency, but probably more legal.
-
Right now, the radical Dems and Republicans are unwilling to even discuss compromise, so the issue of what could be a fair deal is being discussed among both parties' "squishes" . But my point is that some compromise is appropriate in order to get the money needed for border security. Assuming, of course, that that's still your goal.
Normalizing the Dreamers is a small price to pay for effective border security.
Maybe but that's assuming you can trust the people you are bargaining with. We can't. Give them a dreamer, they'll take a mile.
-
Normalizing the Dreamers is a small price to pay for effective border security.
Been there, done that. Trump already tried normalizing the Dreamers. But the second the Dems found out that Trump was supporting the Dreamers, they withdrew their support.
-
So long as the compromise includes the money the President needs for border security, what's wrong with that?
Everything. As I've tried to explain before, compromising on the sovereignty of our country is absolutely unacceptable in any way, shape or form.
All the DEMS are interested in are votes and to ascertain complete power and control. DACA, Dreamers, Amensty, Asylum = eventual DEM votes which will mathematically eliminate the chances of a GOP being seated in the House, Senate or oval office.
It truly is very disheartening that the GOP had complete control and power of the Oval office, House and Senate and because they couldn't get their ducks in a row and stick together, here we sit. The GOP may have had the majority, but obviously the DEMS were and still are in control.
-
Right now, the radical Dems and Republicans are unwilling to even discuss compromise, so the issue of what could be a fair deal is being discussed among both parties' "squishes" . But my point is that some compromise is appropriate in order to get the money needed for border security. Assuming, of course, that that's still your goal.
Normalizing the Dreamers is a small price to pay for effective border security.
We tried that compromise crap over 30 years with Reagan, It doesn't work with the Democrats, as they will not go along with their end of the bargain.
So no thanks, we do not give in.
-
We tried that compromise crap over 30 years with Reagan, It doesn't work with the Democrats, as they will not go along with their end of the bargain.
So no thanks, we do not give in.
In any compromise between good and evil, it is only evil that can profit.
-Ayn Rand-
-
It truly is very disheartening that the GOP had complete control and power of the Oval office, House and Senate and because they couldn't get their ducks in a row and stick together, here we sit. The GOP may have had the majority, but obviously the DEMS were and still are in control.
And therein lies the paucity of pragmatism. BECAUSE people want Republican butts in the seats MORE THAN principled Conservatism (which the Republicans purport to use as their platform), there is not enough unity under the standard to get anything done.
It isn't that Conservatives won't compromise, it's that Republicans have become so politically promiscuous that they bear no standard *At ALL* - And without that standard, there is nothing to raise for folks to run to and fight for.
It has been reduced to whatever is popular and centers upon 'heroes' that will never be able to unite everyone. Thus the dilemma.
If you stand for nothing, you'll fight for nothing, and populism is the bitter end... and a damnable shame.
-
NO !!
No "deals".
These things ALWAYS favor the democrat-communists.
Gonna repeat:
NO DEALS !
-
We tried that compromise crap over 30 years with Reagan, It doesn't work with the Democrats, as they will not go along with their end of the bargain.
So no thanks, we do not give in.
Your trust is misplaced in Republicans as well - Remember, it was Kay Bailey Hutchison, a Texan and a Republican, that ramrodded the bill that removed the funding for Hunter's Fence after it had passed.
-
Your trust is misplaced in Republicans as well - Remember, it was Kay Bailey Hutchison, a Texan and a Republican, that ramrodded the bill that removed the funding for Hunter's Fence after it had passed.
She was a liberal RINO since day one. We did not want her for Governor either.
Ted is a nice replacement for her.
Now we need Cornyn to go down.......