• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Trump wants to build the wall with Military funds

Calminian

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Our Commander in Chief made an interesting tweet.

Donald J. Trump‏Verified account @realDonaldTrump
Because of the $700 & $716 Billion Dollars gotten to rebuild our Military, many jobs are created and our Military is again rich. Building a great Border Wall, with drugs (poison) and enemy combatants pouring into our Country, is all about National Defense. Build WALL through M!

3:33 AM - 25 Mar 2018​

He's got a point, it's definitely a national security issue. He could probably make the case it would save the military money in the long run. Just curious if he can actually do this.
 

Calminian

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
This would be a fantastic way to subvert both the dems and Rinos.

Curious who's in favor of this. I have zero problem with it.

Donald J. Trump‏Verified account @realDonaldTrump
Because of the $700 & $716 Billion Dollars gotten to rebuild our Military, many jobs are created and our Military is again rich. Building a great Border Wall, with drugs (poison) and enemy combatants pouring into our Country, is all about National Defense. Build WALL through M!

3:33 AM - 25 Mar 2018​

My guess is Trump could get it done with less than 10 billion. The question is, not just should he, but could he actually do this? Liberal media seems to be implying he can't. Schumer says he can't. But I ask, why not?

Should the Military Build the Wall?

Trump privately proposed military funding for his border wall, report says
 

Calminian

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
So would it be illegal using military funds to build a wall? Are all the military funds already specifically allocated in the spending bill?
 

Calminian

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Schumer doesn't like. I think Trump can win this. At the very least he'll put pressure on Republicans to get with the program.

SCHUMER THREATENS SUIT IF TRUMP USES PENTAGON FOR WALL

Schumer Threatens Lawsuits If Trump Uses Pentagon for Border Wall

GettyImages-931540354-640x480.jpg

MANDEL NGAN/AFP/Getty Images

by NEIL MUNRO27 Mar 20182,761

Democratic leader Sen. Chuck Schumer says any effort by President Donald Trump to use military funding to build his border wall be blocked by lawsuits, according to the Washington Post.

The Washington Post reported that Trump is pushing military officials to shift a very small portion of their $700 billion 2018 budget to build up border defenses, and quoted Schumer saying:

This would be a blatant misuse of military funds and tied up in court for years. [Defense] Secretary Mattis ought not bother and instead use the money to help our troops, rather than advance the president’s political fantasies.

Schumer’s threat came after he worked with GOP leaders to allocate only $641 million for the construction of new border fences in the 2018 omnibus bill. The bill also includes language which bars Trump from spending money on the concrete-and-metal prototype walls which he touted in early March. According to the Post:

Trump, who told advisers he was spurned in a large spending bill last week when lawmakers only appropriated $1.6 billion for the border wall, has begun suggesting the Pentagon could fund the sprawling construction, citing a “national security” risk.

After floating the notion to several advisers last week, he told Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) that the military should pay for the wall in a meeting last Wednesday in the White House residence, according to three people familiar with the meeting. Ryan offered little reaction to the notion, these people said, but senior Capitol Hill officials later said it was an unlikely prospect.

Long-standing laws sharply restrict what “reprogramming” Presidents can do with appropriated funds. For example, President must spend most of the funds allocated by Congress, and can only shift a small percentage of each program’s funds to another program.

However, Trump is also the Commander in Chief of the military, and he has begun arguing that border defenses are a national security need which falls outside Congress’ direct control. On March 25, for example, he argued that the wall should be built by the military, dubbed “M”

Trump’s push to enlist the military in his wall-building plans are likely to be resisted by Defense Secretary Jame Mattis, who has successfully avoided most partisan disputes. Also, Pentagon leaders do not want to divert troops and funding to a police-style mission on the border.

Former Sen. Jeff Sessions, now the Attorney General, may also oppose the reprogramming effort, in part, because he spent much time trying to block former President Barack Obama from evading Congress’ controls, such as Obama’s attempted 2012 ‘DACA’ amnesty.

But any dispute with Washington may help Trump show his political distance from Washington D.C., especially after D.C. insiders united to block his immigration reforms in the February Senate debate and in the March omnibus spending plan.
 
Last edited:

Judith

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
First ALL legal immigration needs to be stopped until our population normalizes which will take at least 50 to 100 years.


All work visas need to be limited to 6 months in and 6 months out and they have to show employer signed proof of employment to get a work visa and if they quit or are fired they have to leave right away or face prison time and a lifetime ban.



They cannot seek employment at another employer without governmental written permission and even then the 6 months clock remains the same. If they overstay they should get 2 years in prison, then deported and banned for life. Third EVERY illegal, all 30 plus million, needs to go as they are criminals according to our laws.



That being said our corrupt government has put the DACA people in a bad way by allowing them to stay so long so here is a possible compromise.



If they really want to stay they should have to pay an annual 2,000 dollar fee and have to register annually with work place and residence information. If they move or change jobs they should have to report that within 10 days. They should be required to carry papers at all times.



They should be required to carry and show proof of health insurance at every annual registration with the insurance company notifying the government if the coverage is dropped.



They should never be allowed to become citizens. They should never be allowed to work for any government entity whether local, state, federal, or serve in the military.



They should never be allowed to vote. If they drive they should receive special drivers licenses alerting law enforcement who they are.



They should never be allowed to own a weapon because they are still criminals being illegal, but with a waver.



They should never be able to receive any government assistance or grants.



If they have any felony convictions they should not be granted the right to remain and if they have one after receiving the waver they should be deported for life.



If they violate any of this they should be deported.
 

Squire Robertsson

Administrator
Administrator
What's the difference between a border wall in 201x and building coastal artillery forts and batteries? Fort Sumter wasn't built to protect Charleston from the Indians.
 

HankD

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
It is becoming more and more obvious to the American public that the progressive left wing of the Democratic party which controls the marxist press is on a rampage to topple President Trump and the nation be darned.

The present Russian-American crisis can be traced back to the Russia-Russia-Russia-Trump-collusion-illusion fake news fiasco which was the Russo-American relations tipping point causing a complaint from Vladimir which was mocked by the left press. Things went downhill from there.

WWWIII on the horizon - EH! - so what - as long as we can impeach the swamp-drainner!
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
I don't mind a wall - good fences make good neighbors. But what happened to Mexico paying for it?

Or....would that be "good neighbors make good fences?" :Biggrin
 

Rob_BW

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
What's the difference between a border wall in 201x and building coastal artillery forts and batteries? Fort Sumter wasn't built to protect Charleston from the Indians.
I don’t know, Squire. Seems like they're on opposite sides of the whole offensive/defensive spectrum.
 

HankD

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Mexico will pay. Trump is not showing his trump card (yes its a pun) yet.

Time will show what it is. I think I know - suspect.

AOBTW, yes even scopes denies it but Mexico itself has about 500 miles of walls and fences on their Mexico-Guatemala border.
It is denied by fact finders because it is not completely contiguous.

Mexico's Forgotten Southern Border
 

rsr

<b> 7,000 posts club</b>
Moderator
Using military appropriations to build the wall is not going to happen. The Senate and House Armed Services Committees are not going to give up a dime to an activity whose appropriation is not specifically approved by Congress and especially by the committees.

Things don't work like that. If you want to reprogram funds to another use, you have to have congressional authorization, not to mention appropriation. It's hard enough to reprogram funds within a department, much less between departments.

Whoever thought this up is just indulging in a pipe dream. I find it hard to believe anyone takes the idea seriously.
 

rsr

<b> 7,000 posts club</b>
Moderator
What's the difference between a border wall in 201x and building coastal artillery forts and batteries? Fort Sumter wasn't built to protect Charleston from the Indians.

And I bet Congress authorized and appropriated every cent for the forts, not for something else.
 

rsr

<b> 7,000 posts club</b>
Moderator
But the question at hand is whether Trump can slide money from something that's authorized to something that isn't. Congress could have reduced funding for other military spending and authorized it for a "a wall," but it specifically chose not to.

Some folks think that a wall is the most pressing defense issue, I guess, even though billions and billions are already being poured into fortification and more agents.

Some folks think that replacing antiquated and worn-out equipment might matter more to the grunt who's depending on it to save his life on the battlefield.
 

HankD

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
The WALL is a symbol which in another dimension is far more powerful than brick and mortar.
 
Top