Results 1 to 28 of 28

Thread: Trump plans to divert $7.2 billion from Pentagon for border wall construction: report

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1

    Trump plans to divert $7.2 billion from Pentagon for border wall construction: report

    https://thehill.com/policy/defense/b...m-pentagon-for

    President Trump plans to divert $7.2 billion from the Pentagon to go toward border wall construction this year, an amount five times greater than what Congress authorized in the budget, The Washington Post reported.

    This would be the second year in a row that money is redirected to the wall on the U.S.-Mexico border from military construction projects and counternarcotics funding.

    The administration will take $3.5 billion from counterdrug programs and $3.7 billion from military construction funding, according to internal planning figures obtained by the Post, compared to $2.5 billion and $3.6 billion, respectively, last year.

    The Defense Department told The Hill that it deferred to the White House to comment. The White House did not immediately return a request for comment.

    A total of $18.4 billion in federal funds has gone to the border wall during Trump’s presidency. The plans indicate that this new boost of funding would allow the administration to build about 885 miles of new fencing by spring of 2022, more than the 509 miles planned for the border, according to the Post.

    So far, the administration has finished 101 miles of new barriers as the end of 2020 deadline by which the president promised 450 miles of new border wall approaches.

    Legal controversy has surrounded the president’s campaign promise, with a federal district court in El Paso, Texas, freezing the $3.6 billion for new barriers because Congress designated it for something else. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit, in New Orleans, reversed that ruling last week.

    Administration officials told the Post that the New Orleans ruling influenced the president and his administration to redirect money again this year.

    Several dozen military construction projects have been delayed or suspended from last year because of the redirection of funds, according to the Post.

    The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) released a statement in response to the Post's reporting.

    "Multiple courts have already ruled that President Trump has no authority to take billions from service members for his xenophobic wall," said Dror Ladin, a staff attorney with the ACLU's National Security Project. "The ACLU won't rest until the president's illegal power grab is blocked once and for all."
    Rand Paul was opposed to Trump trying to do this before.

    https://www.detroitnews.com/story/ne...wall/39145265/

    Sen. Rand Paul parting ways with Trump on border wall

    Washington – Opponents of President Donald Trump’s declaration of a national emergency at the U.S.-Mexico border appear to have enough Senate votes to reject his move, now that Republican Rand Paul of Kentucky has said he can’t go along with the White House.

    The House has voted to derail the action, and if the Senate follows later this month, the measure would go to Trump for his promised veto.

    Three other Republican senators have announced they’ll vote “no” – Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Thom Tillis of North Carolina. Paul makes it four, and assuming that all 47 Democrats and their independent allies go against Trump, that would give opponents 51 votes – just past the majority needed.

    Congress is unlikely to have the votes to override.

    “I can’t vote to give the president the power to spend money that hasn’t been appropriated by Congress,” Paul said at a GOP dinner Saturday night at Western Kentucky University, according to the Bowling Green (Ky.) Daily News.

    “We may want more money for border security, but Congress didn’t authorize it. If we take away those checks and balances, it’s a dangerous thing.”



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    Temporary Ban New York, NY



    Posts
    746
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Great News!

  4. #3
    Zippy delivers, his No Comment policy remains unchanged.

  5. #4

  6. #5
    Enjoy it while you can, because it's only going to be torn down anyway.

  7. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Snowball View Post
    Enjoy it while you can, because it's only going to be torn down anyway.
    No it won't.

  8. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    No it won't.

    Why not just stop the incentives, save the $$ and retain the right to travel freely, along with protecting private property rights?

    Oooooops... I forgot about the statist agenda... federal government eminent domain, government mandated minimum wage, eligibility for government programs... not to mention “optional” eVerify” chip and papers please, fed to a Fed database, which will require all Americans to happily hop on board to distinguish “them” from from us. It is the only way to “protect our libertwiz”, stupid, stupid, leftist me.
    “The right to life is the source of all rights—and the right to property is their only implementation. Without property rights, no other rights are possible. Since man has to sustain his life by his own effort, the man who has no right to the product of his effort has no means to sustain his life. The man who produces while others dispose of his product, is a slave.”

    Read the RPF trolls' playbook here (post #3)

  9. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by PAF View Post
    Why not just stop the incentives, save the $$ and retain the right to travel freely, along with protecting private property rights?

    Oooooops... I forgot about the statist agenda... federal government eminent domain, government mandated minimum wage, eligibility for government programs... not to mention “optional” eVerify” chip and papers please, fed to a Fed database, which will require all Americans to happily hop on board to distinguish “them” from from us. It is the only way to “protect our libertwiz”, stupid, stupid, leftist me.
    You can't stop the main incentive unless you purposely impoverish Americans.
    And if you don't stop the invasion they will impose communism.



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    You can't stop the main incentive unless you purposely impoverish Americans.
    And if you don't stop the invasion they will impose communism.
    Communism, or communism... what a choice. Yeah, I guess forfeiting liberties to achieve communism is definitely the way to go, otherwise we will get communism.

    Great thinker there, SS!
    “The right to life is the source of all rights—and the right to property is their only implementation. Without property rights, no other rights are possible. Since man has to sustain his life by his own effort, the man who has no right to the product of his effort has no means to sustain his life. The man who produces while others dispose of his product, is a slave.”

    Read the RPF trolls' playbook here (post #3)

  12. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by PAF View Post
    Why not just stop the incentives, save the $$ and retain the right to travel freely, along with protecting private property rights?

    Oooooops... I forgot about the statist agenda... federal government eminent domain, government mandated minimum wage, eligibility for government programs... not to mention “optional” eVerify” chip and papers please, fed to a Fed database, which will require all Americans to happily hop on board to distinguish “them” from from us. It is the only way to “protect our libertwiz”, stupid, stupid, leftist me.
    Stop the incentives? The biggest incentive is security and salaries. The Mexican government is run by cartels so people live under a criminal government. The only way to get rid of that incentive is to let so many people immigrate here that there is no difference in job opportunities and salary or go to war with the mexican cartels or arm the government of Mexico to root them out.

  13. #11
    I'm surprised Rand isn't a little more open to this.

    It diverts money away from the military industrial complex to be used on actual defense. Congress appropriated the defense funds, the President is executing on how those defense funds get spent.
    "He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
    "dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc
    "When you are divided, and angry, and controlled, you target those 'different' from you, not those responsible [controllers]" -Q

    "Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul

    "Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."

  14. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by dannno View Post
    I'm surprised Rand isn't a little more open to this.

    It diverts money away from the military industrial complex to be used on actual defense. Congress appropriated the defense funds, the President is executing on how those defense funds get spent.
    Would you also be fine with a President Clinton diverting funds to pay for say a national healthcare program?

  15. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    Would you also be fine with a President Clinton diverting funds to pay for say a national healthcare program?
    That's not a defense use.

  16. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    Would you also be fine with a President Clinton diverting funds to pay for say a national healthcare program?
    Is this really diverting funds? What kind of monkey argument is this? Securing the border is the role of the government and the military

  17. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by nikcers View Post
    Is this really diverting funds? What kind of monkey argument is this? Securing the border is the role of the government and the military
    On the original amounts, Congress specified that none of the money was to be for the wall- it was not just general Defense spending. That is why Rand is against it. Congress gets to decide how much money to spend on what- not the President.

  18. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    On the original amounts, Congress specified that none of the money was to be for the wall- it was not just general Defense spending. That is why Rand is against it. Congress gets to decide how much money to spend on what- not the President.
    Then Congress needs to revoke the standing permission to the President to divert the funds that they gave him.



  19. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  20. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    On the original amounts, Congress specified that none of the money was to be for the wall- it was not just general Defense spending. That is why Rand is against it. Congress gets to decide how much money to spend on what- not the President.
    Its sort of the presidents job to command the armies and defend the country though. Congress is the purse and legislative branch.

  21. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    Would you also be fine with a President Clinton diverting funds to pay for say a national healthcare program?
    Zippy made a comment. It was a total miss however.

  22. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by timosman View Post
    Zippy made a comment. It was a total miss however.
    I think he has been replaced with an ai bot. I couldn't even bait him into debating his arguments with silly figures of speech.

  23. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    Would you also be fine with a President Clinton diverting funds to pay for say a national healthcare program?
    Quote Originally Posted by timosman View Post
    Zippy made a comment. It was a total miss however.
    YES and NO. Lets do assume poor Hillary did not have that bad but brief bout of the winter flu & that she did
    McKinley handshakes to half the voters in the state of Michigan in 2016 and two or three more states like that.
    POTUS H.R CLINTON could have gotten herself impeached by Paul Ryan had she done a slew of "creative" lil
    sly gestures like that, all for the good of the country. Run rings around Congress. Kept Congress out of the loop.

  24. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    Would you also be fine with a President Clinton diverting funds to pay for say a national healthcare program?
    If it were funds already stolen for health care for people under retirement age I am not sure it would matter . I also am unsure why I should care the Pentagon does not get these funds and they are used for border security. Granted it would be better if they were used as tax refunds but congress is not going to approve that either …...

  25. #22
    The pentagon needs it's spending curbed. So does the medical industrial complex.

  26. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by Working Poor View Post
    The pentagon needs it's spending curbed. So does the medical industrial complex.
    Medicine and education is a big one that has a lot of waste but we probably should increase military spending. One way to have a volunteer army instead of a draft is to pay more. That makes it to where people with lots of money are still contributing significantly too because they pay the most tax.

  27. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by nikcers View Post
    Medicine and education is a big one that has a lot of waste but we probably should increase military spending. One way to have a volunteer army instead of a draft is to pay more. That makes it to where people with lots of money are still contributing significantly too because they pay the most tax.
    Amash>Trump

    ΟΥ ΓΑΡ ЄCΤΙΝ ЄξΟΥCΙΑ ЄΙ ΜΗ ΥΠΟ ΘЄΟΥ

    "Patriotism should come from loving thy neighbor, not from worshiping graven images" - Ironman77

    "ideas have the potential of being more powerful than any army....The concept of personal sovereignty was pulled screaming from the ether into this reality by the force of men believing in a self evident truth, that men are meant to be free." - The Northbreather

    "Trump is the security blanket of aggrieved white men aged 18-60." - Pinoy



  28. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  29. #25
    Good. It almost sounds like a platitude, but a country's defense should be of its own borders, not the Syrian/Iraqi/Iranian borders.



Similar Threads

  1. Trump border wall: US president suffers new construction setback
    By Zippyjuan in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-04-2019, 11:31 AM
  2. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 04-01-2019, 01:49 PM
  3. Replies: 9
    Last Post: 03-20-2019, 01:16 AM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-13-2018, 01:01 PM
  5. TRUMP's border wall plan materializes - Construction to begin in March
    By goldenequity in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: 01-26-2017, 01:15 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •