“They were recently telling that source of mine, ‘Don’t worry, it’s not going to happen.'”
APRIL 26, 2017
While President Trump remains resolute that a border wall will be built in his first term, other sources are less confident, with one declaring that senior Republican Senators consider the idea to be a joke.
Appearing on Sean Hannity’s show Tuesday, Conservative radio host and author Laura Ingraham said that sources told her that senior Republican lawmakers literally ‘laughed out loud’ at the idea a wall would be built.
“One thing I know for sure, Sean, is that we have way too many people on Capitol Hill who are not on the president’s side of this. I’m talking Republicans.” Ingraham stated.
“So I have no doubt in my mind that Donald Trump wants this wall to be built. Congress has to appropriate the money. I heard over two months ago that GOP leadership, the most senior senators on Capitol Hill, and I heard it from someone who was in the room with them, they were laughing at an idea a wall would ever get built. Out loud laughing.” Ingraham claimed.
“They were recently telling that source of mine, ‘Don’t worry, it’s not going to happen.’” the pundit added.
Trump himself stated yesterday that he is confident that construction of the wall will begin soon.
When repeatedly asked “When will the wall get built?” by CBS reporter Major Garrett, Trump replied “It will start soon, very soon,”
“In your first term?” Garrett asked.
“Well it’s certainly gonna — yeah,” the president answered.
“Sure. We have plenty of time. Got a lot of time,” he added.
Trump also took to Twitter and derided the “fake media,” saying that he has not changed his position on the wall idea, and that It will get built and help stop drugs, human trafficking, etc.,”
Meanwhile, Democrats continue to deride the idea, with some throwing every conspiracy theory they can think of at it.
The Hill reported Monday:
In a conference call with reporters, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-California, criticized Trump’s late push for some funding for the wall now, which she said would be wrong if it was budgeted for at the expense of government programs like those that help young people, the elderly and the environment.
“He did not promise that he would take food out of the mouths of babies and seniors and education, clean air, clean water, scientific research off the table in a significant way in order for him to pay for his immoral, ineffective, unwise proposal of a wall,” Pelosi said.
But she said she was open to some technology and other improvements at the border so long as they were not related in any way to the planning, prepping or building of the wall itself.
By Terence P. Jeffrey
When Donald Trump stood in the lobby of Trump Tower on June 16, 2015 and announced he was running for president, he told all who listened to “mark” his words.
“I would do various things very quickly,” Trump said.
“I would repeal and replace the big lie, Obamacare,” he said.
“I will build a great, great wall on our southern border,” he said. “And I will have Mexico pay for that wall.
“Mark my words,” he said.
Fifteen months later — after he won the Republican nomination and less than two months before his general election showdown — Trump released a letter to pro-life leaders.
“As we head into the final stretch of the campaign, the help of leaders like you is essential to ensure that pro-life voters know where I stand, and also know where my opponent, Hillary Clinton, stands,” Trump wrote.
“I am committed,” Trump said, “to: … Defunding Planned Parenthood as long as they continue to perform abortions, and re-allocating their funding to community health centers that provide comprehensive health care for women.”
In his inaugural address, Trump did not back away from his pledge to secure the border.
“We will bring back our borders,” he vowed.
Three days later, he used executive authority to reinstate the Mexico City policy, which denies federal funding to organizations that provide or promote abortions abroad.
But he needed congressional action to defund Planned Parenthood at home, and a congressional appropriation to begin building the wall he said would ultimately be funded by Mexico.
A week after Trump’s inauguration, Vice President Mike Pence told the March for Life that Trump would keep his pro-life promises — with the help of the newly elected, Republican-majority, pro-life Congress.
“Life is winning again in America,” Pence said.
“That is evident in the election of pro-life majorities in the Congress of the United States of America,” he said. “But it is no more evident, in any way, than in the historic election of a president who stands for a stronger America, a more prosperous America, and a president who, I proudly say, stands for the right to life — President Donald Trump.”
“I like to say that over there at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, we are in the promise-keeping business,” said Pence.
“That’s why on Monday, President Trump reinstated the Mexico City Policy to prevent foreign aid from funding organizations that promote or perform abortions worldwide,” said Pence. “That’s why this administration will work with the Congress to end taxpayer funding of abortion and abortion providers, and we will devote those resources to health care services for women across America.”
In 2011, after Republicans won back control of the House in the 2010 election, then-Rep. Pence introduced an amendment that would, as Pence put it, “deny any and all funding to Planned Parenthood Federation of America and its affiliates for the rest of the fiscal year.”
“I rise tonight because I also believe it’s morally wrong to take the taxpayer dollars of millions of pro-life Americans and use it to fund organizations that provide and promote abortion — like Planned Parenthood of America,” Pence said when his amendment was considered on the House floor.
The House passed Pence’s 2011 amendment, including it in the first funding bill approved by the then-new House Republican majority. But then-House Speaker John Boehner subsequently cut a spending deal with the Democrats in the Senate and the White House that did not include Pence’s amendment to defund Planned Parenthood.
According to the Congressional Research Service, the Government Accountability Office determined that Planned Parenthood Federation of America affiliates received $400.56 million in Medicaid reimbursements in both federal and state dollars in 2012. Planned Parenthood affiliates, according to GAO, also spent $64.35 million in federal Title X funding in 2012.
When the House Republican leaders this year put together their weak and redistributionist reconciliation bill to “repeal and replace” Obamacare, it included language that would have denied Medicaid money to Planned Parenthood — for just one year. But it would not have denied Title X money to Planned Parenthood — because reconciliation bills do not deal with discretionary spending like that doled out under Title X.
When principled House conservatives opposed that Obamacare bill, the Republican leadership did not bring it up for a vote.
Now, Congress faces an April 28 deadline to pass a new government funding bill.
There is currently no talk that it will include language to prohibit funding of Planned Parenthood.
But there is talk that it will not include the language that President Trump has requested to provide $1.4 billion to begin his project to build “a great, great wall on our southern border.”
The Republican House can pass and send to the Republican Senate a bill that funds the border wall but not Planned Parenthood. Or they can pass one that funds Planned Parenthood but not the border wall.
The former course of action would fulfill the campaign promises that got their president elected. The latter would appease congressional Democrats and the liberal press.
So, which will it be?
By Bob Price
Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) introduced a bill calling for the use of $14 billion seized from cartel drug lord Joaquin “El Chapo” Guzman to be used to pay for the President’s border wall between the U.S. and Mexico.
“Fourteen billion dollars will go a long way toward building a wall that will keep Americans safe and hinder the illegal flow of drugs, weapons, and individuals across our southern border,” Senator Cruz stated, according to a statement obtained by Breitbart Texas from the senator’s office. “Ensuring the safety and security of Texans is one of my top priorities.”
The Texas senator said that leveraging criminally forfeited assets from El Chapo and other Mexican cartel members and drug dealers can “offset the wall’s cost and make meaningful progress toward achieving President Trump’s stated border security objectives.”
Senator Cruz introduced the Ensuring Lawful Collection of Hidden Assets to Provide Order (EL CHAPO) Act on Tuesday. “The U.S. Government is currently seeking the criminal forfeiture of more than $14 billion in drug proceeds and illicit profits from El Chapo, the former leader of the Sinaloa drug cartel who was recently extradited to the U.S. to face criminal prosecution for numerous alleged drug-related crimes, including conspiracy to commit murder and money laundering,” Cruz stated.
The Mexican government extradited the former Mexican drug kingpin in January, Breitbart Texas’ Ildefonso Ortiz reported. The move to an American prison cell followed months of court battles in Mexico and multiple escapes from prison by Guzman. As part of the agreement with Mexico, Guzman will not face the death penalty in the U.S. for his crimes. Prosecutors filed murder charges against the former drug lord in relation to the killings of a U.S. citizen and two relatives.
A US judge on Tuesday blocked President Donald Trump‘s executive order that sought to withhold federal funds from so-called sanctuary cities, dealing another legal blow to the administration’s immigration priorities.
The ruling from US District Judge William Orrick III in San Francisco said Trump’s January 25 order targeted broad categories of federal funding for sanctuary governments and that plaintiffs challenging the order were likely to succeed in proving it unconstitutional.
The Trump administration suffered an earlier defeat in the courts when two federal judges suspended executive orders restricting travel from several Muslim-majority countries. The government has appealed those decisions.
Representatives for the US Justice Department and the White House were not immediately available for comment on the sanctuary ruling.
Sanctuary cities generally offer safe harbor to illegal immigrants and often do not use municipal funds or resources to advance the enforcement of federal immigration laws.
Santa Clara County, which includes the city of San Jose and several smaller Silicon Valley communities, sued in February, saying Trump’s plan to withhold federal funds was unconstitutional. San Francisco filed a similar lawsuit.
Santa Clara County receives about $1.7 billion in federal and federally dependent funds annually, about 35 percent of its total revenues. The county argued it was owed millions of dollars of federal funding every day and that its budgetary planning process had been thrown into disarray by the order.
The Justice Department said the counties had taken an overly broad interpretation of the president’s order, which would affect only Justice Department and Department of Homeland Security funds, a fraction of the grant money received by the counties.
In his ruling, Orrick said the language of the order made it clear it sought to withhold funds beyond law enforcement.
“And if there was doubt about the scope of the Order, the President and Attorney General have erased it with their public comments,” Orrick wrote.
The judge cited comments from Trump calling the order “a weapon” to use against jurisdictions that disagree with his immigration policies.
“Federal funding that bears no meaningful relationship to immigration enforcement cannot be threatened merely because a jurisdiction chooses an immigration enforcement strategy of which the President disapproves,” Orrick wrote.
Dave Cortese, president of the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors, said in a statement: “The politics of fear emanating from the Trump White House has just suffered a major setback.”
There is no clear definition of “sanctuary city” in federal law, but Justice Department lawyer Chad Readler told the judge that the executive order would only apply to three programs administered by the DOJ or the Department of Homeland Security, “a very narrow range of funding,” Readler told the judge, according to the San Francisco Chronicle.
Readler reportedly said that San Francisco doesn’t currently receive funds from those programs, but that Santa Clara County receives about $1 million.
San Francisco and Santa Clara County argued their case based on the doctrine of anti-commandeering, a principle recognized by the US Supreme Court in the 1997 gun control case Printz v. United States. In that case, a conservative sheriff sued the government, and won, arguing he was not required to enforce federal gun background checks.
By Jim Hoft
Brandon Judd, National Border Patrol Council President
Border Patrol Council President Brandon Judd blasted Speaker Paul Ryan for not funding President Trump’s border wall in this year’s budget.
Judd joined Stewart Varney this morning on Varney and Co.
Stewart Varney:There is a report this morning that Speaker Paul Ryan is suggesting that Congress delay border wall funding until next year. What do you say about that?
Brandon Judd:I disagree. President Trump promised he was going to secure the border and part of securing the border is putting in place the proper technology and resources that allows us to be successful. And a border wall in strategic locations is one of those things that must get done.