Listen: President Trump, President And US discussed on Rob Pratte
"Still no deal in sight to end that government shutdown in its third week. Now, President Trump is going to make his case for the border wall in a primetime address from the Oval Office tomorrow evening. Still Democrats are insisting they will not pay for it committed labor now is in Washington with the latest. The government shutdown fight continues. And President Trump will address the nation Tuesday to talk about what he says is a crisis at the border that on Thursday he will travel to the US Mexico border. We have a crisis at the border of drugs human beings, being traffic all over the world. They're coming through the president is asking for nearly six billion dollars for the wall. Eight something the Democrats say they won't give him. Is an immorality, but as both sides refused to give in thousands of federal employees continue to be affected and Friday will be the first time, these employee's won't be getting their usual paycheck. It's gonna come to a point where you say to put gas in my car or do I feed my family? President Trump has said he can relate to those federal employees. He's also said he's considering bypassing congress by declaring a national emergency at the border. What that means in terms of adding new elements to this in terms of court hearings have litigation that make carry this on for weeks and months and years to me injecting a new element into this just makes it more complicated. Vice President Mike Pence confirmed the president's plan and told reporters Monday that the White House counsel is looking into the implications of declaring a national emergency in Washington. I'm Camille lover now. So let's talk about just where this whole thing is going now as we are still eyeball to eyeball. And nobody seems to be in the mood to blink. Daniel Lipman joins us. He is the playbook editor at the website, politico dot com. Daniel good evening. Jim first of all, I suppose that we might as well talk about this notion of of the the national emergency declaration presidents do have such powers. Although I gather there is now some difference of opinion, quite understandably from the Democrats just to whether or not such emergency powers apply in this case. What can you add to our perspective? Yes. Jay Johnson, the former homeland security. Secretary during the Obama administration said that the law is that Trump could invoke with his national emergency declaration are designed to authorize military construction projects during wartime. Not, you know, build a wall that is completely unrelated to the usual military construction budgets, which are meant to build base housing into, you know, build and repair bridges and roads on military bases. Not build a wall that is not the usual funding mechanism. That's an interesting interpretation, of course, building base housing unless you're talking about the aftermath of a hurricane or a fire hardly falls under the definition of an emergency. Yeah. So this would really be stretching the limits of the law, and you're going to see lots of court challenges because the Democrats and civil libertarians in pro-immigration groups to say that Trump is using unconstitutional means to build his wall, given that congress has not appropriate at money, even when it was under completely Balkan control over the last couple of years, they still do not give much money for this project. And so this is a real sticking point because Trump wants to amp up the crisis and show that there's a huge emergency. And in fact, there is a big humanitarian emergency. But. Trump and have not been addressing that as much as maybe they could've remember, you know, there are several kids who've died. Better medical as regards. Yeah. Mister johnson. I guess was that he's named. Jay Johnson Johnson. Yeah. Yes. My my point was that his definition of of of this applying to to building housing in the like hardly meets the definition of an emergency. I could you know, go further in that direction of the idea that thousands of people into the country. Without permission strikes me and a lot of other people as an emergency. And the fact that people who who come here and put their own children at jeopardy in doing. So under circumstances in which the government has done all it can to save those children strikes me that the responsibility of met particular case for any humanitarian problems lie with the parents are not with the US government. So I can certainly see the president's side of this equation to say the least. Yeah. I think there's a lot of Americans share your point of view. But also remember that Jordy of Americans in in any poll at I've seen. Between fifty six to fifty percent are against building the wall. And so. And and a lot of Democrats the region that one of the reasons that they are standing by. So firm against this is that they saw during the last couple of weeks of the campaign two thousand eighteen that. Republicans and Trump they tried to amp up the anti immigration. And kind of create fear about what was going to happen if as to control and yet Democrats still won the house of representatives. And so that is giving reassurance regret that if they keep their promises and not give into the president that they will order by. And that is not in Nazi poses best interests and other senior Democrats two weeks. This is something that has to be clarified here. This is not about nor has it ever been about immigration. This is about illegal immigration has nothing whatsoever to do with immigration has to do with violations of US law. And I think that point should be should be driven home in terms of public support. Whether it's for a quote wall, or or whatever else may be there is a substantial public support for the notion of just border security something like three quarters of Americans support adequate security for the border. So to a certain extent, I think polls on this subject are very much like polls on abortion. Do you favor? A woman's right to choose. We'll get a much different response from do you favor. The protection of the unborn this sort of thing. So the key here. I think on such polls probably is in the. Exact wording. Yeah. The questions aren't that? Waffly? It is basically do you support money a federal government money to build a border wall on the US Mexican border? And there was some interesting NBC news reporting today that remember how Sarah Sanders and other Trump officials have talked about the the immigrants who are pouring in who are terrorists across the southern border. Well, they looked at the data. And they've only found six in the last year that have there were on any terrorist watchlist while triple the amount came in from the Canadian border. So maybe we'll need to walls to address concerns. And so. That is I, you know, the Trump administration has been using. It's been increasing the fear levels. When in fact, there aren't that many people who were? Curates who are coming through the. But that's hardly. The only reason. I mean, let let's face it. I mean, no matter what it may be be at the MS, thirteen gangs. Be it people who haven't received their vaccination be a drug cartels terrorists. Whatever every nation has the right? And I would argue the responsibility to determine who gets in. And you can't do that. When you're being bums rushed at the border. You've got to stop the bum's rush and vet people one by one. And that's all that this is about here. If in fact, we find out that nobody is a terrorist. No MS thirteen members no drug cartels. We're still talking about people who are coming here when they haven't been invited in which is quite substantial, and which is certainly substantial for me as far as that goes one eight six six five go go ahead. And then we'll take a call. I well, he mentioned that this is more about illegal immigration than than legal immigration. Democrats would respond that Stephen Miller, and the White House have really talked about has done a lots of things about, you know, cutting down legal immigration, and that's another issue. I mean, that's another issue. Talk a little bit. The the point the point of the whole thing is that a rational immigration policy for any sovereign nation, which we happen to be and we live in a world of sovereign nations where the only alternative to sovereign nations for at least the next century or so is anarchy or tribalism, which is the same thing. We live in a world in which in fact, we have the right and the responsibility to determine who gets in how many for what reasons and for how long and that's. To be perfectly rational basis for determining who gets in always the basis for many people in the country ought to be those who are in the best interest of the host country. I know a lot of people come here. But that that, you know, I I want Ross Perot's back account too. I just don't happen to have any right to Ross Perot's Bank account. I think it's a good idea that we look at we look at who is coming in who is staying in at the same time. We don't want people who are not holding town. Good jobs. We also don't want to spend public money educating people in our universities from India or China, and then shipping them back if they have PHD's when they could be very productive citizens worked for. Yeah. Makes startup whatever. Whatever the rules may be that we choose to use to determine for example, if we didn't have a foreign immigration are graduate schools of science, and engineering would be almost empty if if it were not for people from other countries, and there is enough of a brain drain that that's that's fine. With me it if we decide that that it is worthwhile that if we're going to help someone let's say get an education that they must spend X number of years in this country, whatever as long as there is a rule book regarding that which is in our best interests. And that we enforce that rule book that that to me is sufficient whatever the details of the rules are is incidental to to having such a set of rules and having that as a rationale I understand that a lot of people want to come here. But but that is not is not a sufficient reason to come here. We'll take a quick break. We're gonna come back and take a call for our guest. He's Daniel Lipman. He is the playbook editor at politico. Dot com, and we speak as the government shutdown continues will look some more of that.."