Trump has not built a single mile of new border fence after 30 months in office

[GMDino]

This was a headline on the Drudge Report.  Weird!

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/trump-has-not-built-a-single-mile-of-new-border-fence-after-30-months-in-office

Quote:SAN DIEGO, California — The Trump administration has not installed a single mile of new wall in a previously fenceless part of the U.S.-Mexico border in the 30 months since President Trump assumed office, despite his campaign promise to construct a “big beautiful wall.”


In a statement last week, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, the federal agency overseeing border barrier construction, confirmed that all the fencing completed since Trump took office is "in place of dilapidated designs" because the existing fence was in need of replacement.


The agency said that it had built 51 miles of steel bollard fence with funding that was set aside during fiscal 2017 and 2018. But while the funding was meant both to replace outdated walls and to place barriers where there previously had been none, the government has only completed the replacement projects. The projects to secure areas with no fence are still in the works.

The 50 miles of completed replacement barrier is a 10-mile gain since early April. In Trump’s two and a half years in office, his administration has installed an average 1.7 miles of barrier per month, and none of it in areas that did not previously have some sort of barrier. A total 205 miles of new and replacement barrier has been funded in the two and a half years since Trump took office.



A senior administration official told the Washington Examiner that Border Patrol and the Army Corps of Engineers moved faster on replacement projects than the new ones because the approval process for environmental and zoning permits was far less extensive than areas of the border with no barrier.


A second senior official defended the administration's progress and blamed Democrats in Congress for blocking funding for additional projects the White House has tried to move on.



"The wall projects are moving along as quickly as practicably possible given the unprecedented obstruction from Democrat lawmakers to protect and prolong open borders," the official wrote in a statement. "These same obstructionists, including many who once supported border barriers, are the same people who would abolish ICE and DHS, let criminals run free across our borders, and turned a blind eye to the scourge human trafficking and child sex slavery enabled by their policies."


Despite the lack of new barriers, Trump has applauded his administration for building more border wall. His 2020 campaign has made the border wall its primary messaging.


Trump's 2020 campaign debuted the slogan "Finish the Wall" at his first rally of 2019 in El Paso, Texas. At one point during his speech, the crowd began cheering "build that wall." Trump responded, "Now, you really mean 'finish that wall,' because we've built a lot of it,” though he did not share numbers with the thousands of people in attendance.


The White House initially persuaded Congress to fund replacement projects in 2017, then moved in 2018 to get more money for both replacement fencing and projects in parts of the border that have no barrier.


Congress in 2017 approved $341 million for 40 miles of replacement wall in San Diego, California; Santa Teresa, North Mexico; Calexico, California; and El Paso, Texas.


“To this date, CBP has completed the construction of approximately 99 percent of the 40 miles funded in fiscal year 2017. Additionally, construction of 35 gates to close gaps in current border infrastructure in the Rio Grande Valley sector continues,” the Department of 
Homeland Security agency said in a statement.


In the 2018 omnibus government funding bill, lawmakers approved $1.375 billion for 80 miles of new and replacement wall in the Rio Grande Valley of Texas, various regions of California, and Yuma, Arizona. CBP said it has finished roughly 10 miles of that portion, of which none has been new fencing.


Meanwhile, the administration maintains that significant portions of new wall will be finished in the time remaining in Trump's term. Army Corps Commanding Gen. Todd T. Semonite said earlier this spring the Corps will put up 450 miles of wall by November 2020.


However, CBP reiterated this month it is only moving on the approximately 205 miles that have been funded as of 2019, including with Treasury Forfeiture Fund dollars Trump redirected through executive action in February. The remaining 85 miles that has already been funded was proposed this year and is intended for the Rio Grande Valley of Texas — some of which is meant to be new wall.


The Trump administration was sued earlier this spring after seizing $6.6 billion in military and other department funding to use for border wall construction. The Justice Department has asked the Supreme Court to weigh in after the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals blocked the White House plan from going forward. The court is expected to rule in the next few weeks.


Roughly 700 miles of the 2,000-mile border has some sort of barrier as a result of the Secure Fence Act, which was passed by Congress during the George W. Bush administration. It was the first major piece of legislation that funded the construction of barriers along the southern border.

Approximately 400 miles is steel fencing comparable to the planned new wall, only shorter. The other 300 miles of barrier is Normandy style, or a handful of steel beams fastened together to prevent vehicular traffic from getting by. However, the four-foot-tall fence does not prevent people from crossing.

[GMDino]

DJT better get busy on that wall.

Wait...

https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/25/politics/us-marines-arrested/index.html

Quote:16 US Marines arrested for alleged crimes including human smuggling and drug-related offenses


Washington (CNN)Sixteen US Marines were arrested Thursday for alleged involvement in various illegal activities ranging from human smuggling to drug-related offenses, according to a statement from the Marine Corps.


The arrests took place in a dramatic fashion on Thursday morning at Camp Pendleton, California, during a battalion formation.


"Information gained from a previous human smuggling investigation precipitated the arrests," the statement said. "None of the Marines arrested or detained for questioning served in support of the Southwest Border Support mission."


Eight other Marines were also questioned on their involvement in alleged drug offenses unrelated to today's arrests, the Marine Corps said.



This story is breaking and will be updated.

[*bfine32*]

Good news Dino, maybe now he can get started:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/u-supreme-court-lets-trump-223553207.html

Quote:The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday handed President Donald Trump a victory by letting his administration redirect $2.5 billion in money approved by Congress for the Pentagon to help build his promised wall along the U.S.-Mexico border even though lawmakers refused to provide funding.

[BmorePat87]

SCOTUS has stayed the injunction preventing the Trump administration from reallocating $2.5b from the military to construct the wall.

In a 5-4 decision, the court weighed whether or not a stay could be granted. In order for that to happen you need to show:

Quote: (1) a reasonable probability that the Court will grant certiorari and (2) a fair prospect that the Court will reverse, but also (3) “‘a likelihood that irreparable harm will result from the denial of a stay.’”

First 2 are easy, it was the last one up for debate. Sierra Club said the injunction is needed to prevent irreparable harm to the environment while the administration argued irreparable harm to the project if they are not able to secure contracts prior to Sept 30th, which they say would effectively kill the project prior to a court ruling on it. Down party lines, the 5 conservatives sided with the administration's argument while the 4 liberals went with the Sierra Club's argument. The majority suggests that in the time between now and a final ruling on the merits of the case, the administration will only have achieved funding, not started the project, hence no irreparable harm to the environment.

The case will go to the appellate court this summer to further rule on the actual merits of the case, something the opinion notes is novel (though not the purview of the opinion so it stops there)

if you're into reading opinions, it's a short one:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/18pdf/19a60_o75p.pdf

[SunsetBengal]

(07-26-2019, 09:15 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: SCOTUS has stayed the injunction preventing the Trump administration from reallocating $2.5b from the military to construct the wall.

In a 5-4 decision, the court weighed whether or not a stay could be granted. In order for that to happen you need to show:


First 2 are easy, it was the last one up for debate. Sierra Club said the injunction is needed to prevent irreparable harm to the environment while the administration argued irreparable harm to the project if they are not able to secure contracts prior to Sept 30th, which they say would effectively kill the project prior to a court ruling on it. Down party lines, the 5 conservatives sided with the administration's argument while the 4 liberals went with the Sierra Club's argument. The majority suggests that in the time between now and a final ruling on the merits of the case, the administration will only have achieved funding, not started the project, hence no irreparable harm to the environment.

The case will go to the appellate court this summer to further rule on the actual merits of the case, something the opinion notes is novel (though not the purview of the opinion so it stops there)

if you're into reading opinions, it's a short one:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/18pdf/19a60_o75p.pdf

Seems like it should be a slam dunk that National Security would override any Sierra Club concerns..

[*bfine32*]

(07-26-2019, 09:39 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Seems like it should be a slam dunk that National Security would override any Sierra Club concerns..

Unless the appeals court is in Cali. 

[BmorePat87]

(07-26-2019, 09:39 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Seems like it should be a slam dunk that National Security would override any Sierra Club concerns..

That wasn't taken into consideration and, if it were, the administration would probably find it harder to argue the national security benefit of a wall versus what they did argue: need to get contracts moving forward in this time and the standing of the Sierra Club to challenge the way the executive branch spends money allocated by the legislative branch (which Breyer goes on to say will be an interesting question to look at once the courts actually review the merits of the case). 

[BmorePat87]

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/federal-judge-declines-block-trump-asylum-restrictions-southern-border-n1033756?fbclid=IwAR1LnBZ-jmtU0jQL8zuYCjTbWNdleSLahKMNPr2HDp_04jZYsCuLg9GQPk4

A federal judge has blocked the administration's recent restrictions on asylum seekers, which had attempted to deny any asylum seekers who traveled through other nations before the US and did not seek asylum there first. The judge noted that Congress has already addressed this and there's a law in place that would send Asylum seekers to other nations that can adequately provide them asylum, so the executive overreach only serves to harm our laws and systems that are in place via the elected representatives of the people.

[GMDino]

Apparently DJT knows he better get SOMETHING built so he's stealing taking money from the military to get Mexico to pay for it?

No shame.
No real emergency.
Now this.

“The Pentagon said on Wednesday it would pull funding from ... schools and daycare centers for military families, as it diverts $3.6 billion to fund President Donald Trump's wall.” https://t.co/wrkxgV6QdJ

— Ryan Goodman (@rgoodlaw) September 4, 2019

 


I would LOVE to take the time to discuss in a nice, rational manner but I'd rather just sit and wonder if the rubes who supported and believed him still do.  

Quote:The Pentagon said on Wednesday it would pull funding from 127 Defense Department projects, including schools and daycare centers for military families, as it diverts $3.6 billion to fund President Donald Trump’s wall along the U.S. border with Mexico.


Schools for the children of U.S. military members from Kentucky to Germany to Japan will be affected. A daycare center at Joint Base Andrews in Maryland - the home of Air Force One - will also have its funds diverted, the Pentagon said.


Trump declared a national emergency earlier this year to access the funds from the military construction budget. In March, the Pentagon sent to Congress a broad list of projects that could be affected.



A Pentagon official said in a briefing that the department was given a “lawful order” by Trump to divert the funds. She said the Pentagon is working closely with Congress and its allies abroad to find funding to replace money diverted for the wall, but that there are not any guarantees that those funds will come.

And look how much he loves the military!  More than any.  Many people say.  

[BrownAssClown]

Promises Made, Promises Kept.

[jj22]

I'm wondering if this will still go through given the backlash for the attack on our Military families as people see what funds he's taking from them. It's not a good look.

[Yojimbo]

What’s hilarious in all this are the dumb Republican senators that were told the military funds wouldn’t come from their states’ projects if the voted for the “emergency” bill and now are losing tens of millions of dollars for their state’s economy. Good job morons.

“Sen. Martha McSally, R-Ariz., who is facing a tough reelection bid in 2020, said a project involving a ground transport equipment building at Fort Huachuca will lose $30 million in project funds.”

https://www.npr.org/2019/09/04/757463817/these-are-the-11-border-projects-getting-funds-intended-for-military-constructio

[*Nately120*]

(09-05-2019, 04:41 PM)jj22 Wrote: I'm wondering if this will still go through given the backlash for the attack on our Military families as people see what funds he's taking from them. It's not a good look.

As long as Trump stands for the anthem he's supporting the military as much as any man can.  Money isn't as important as respect.

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(09-05-2019, 07:01 PM)Yojimbo Wrote: What’s hilarious in all this are the dumb Republican senators that were told the military funds wouldn’t come from their states’ projects if the voted for the “emergency” bill and now are losing tens of millions of dollars for their state’s economy. Good job morons.

“Sen. Martha McSally, R-Ariz., who is facing a tough reelection bid in 2020, said a project involving a ground transport equipment building at Fort Huachuca will lose $30 million in project funds.”

https://www.npr.org/2019/09/04/757463817/these-are-the-11-border-projects-getting-funds-intended-for-military-constructio

Youri post actually makes me curious about something that I hadn't thought of until just now because you specifically brought up Arizona.

Say they lose $30m in project funds in their state. $3.6b is being spent on the border wall. Eyeball estimate that Arizona is about 20% of the Mexico-US border. 20% of $3.6b is $720m being spent in their state. Add on the fact that they will need to hire labor, that labor needs to sleep somewhere, needs to eat somewhere, needs to buy groceries and the like somewhere, and it actually looks like it would become a major positive financially for Arizona even if they lose $30m in project funds, to the tune of well over 20x more money being spent in their state.

So doesn't that mean the real losers are the ones with no US-Mexico border in their state? Seems like California, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas will end up coming on top in the end.

[Yojimbo]

(09-05-2019, 08:11 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Youri post actually makes me curious about something that I hadn't thought of until just now because you specifically brought up Arizona.

Say they lose $30m in project funds in their state. $3.6b is being spent on the border wall. Eyeball estimate that Arizona is about 20% of the Mexico-US border. 20% of $3.6b is $720m being spent in their state. Add on the fact that they will need to hire labor, that labor needs to sleep somewhere, needs to eat somewhere, needs to buy groceries and the like somewhere, and it actually looks like it would become a major positive financially for Arizona even if they lose $30m in project funds, to the tune of well over 20x more money being spent in their state.

So doesn't that mean the real losers are the ones with no US-Mexico border in their state? Seems like California, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas will end up coming on top in the end.

Fair point. Additional consideration, which is more likely to get built/spent? The military money is bipartisan, unfortunately, but all the wall money won’t be spent if Trump doesn’t win re-election in 2020. Never mind, they’d probably just move the money back to the military project.

[BmorePat87]

In a new book, it is being revealed that in addition to calling for migrants legs to be shot at, Trump said the wall would be electrified, have flesh piercing spikes at the top, and have a moat with alligators or snakes ...

https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2019/10/01/donald-trump-migrants-snakes-alligators-trench-nyt-sot-vpx-tsr.cnn

[Dill]

(10-01-2019, 10:50 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: In a new book, it is being revealed that in addition to calling for migrants legs to be shot at, Trump said the wall would be electrified, have flesh piercing spikes at the top, and have a moat with alligators or snakes ...

https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2019/10/01/donald-trump-migrants-snakes-alligators-trench-nyt-sot-vpx-tsr.cnn

Beginning to sound like a neat video game. 

"The Wall"--kind of like grand theft auto, where players get points for killing individuals (20 pts), children (30 pts), a family of four (100 pts), or an entire "caravan" of 20+ (500 pts.).   Some of them could be ISIS members or Al Qaeda (50 pts).  Points off for killing a legal Mexican farmer (-10) on his side of the border or an American (-20). Killing a legal immigrant would be no points either way.

Range of weapons--from knife to Rpg to call-in attack copter strikes.  Land mines could be integrated into the 'scape as well.

To win you have to reduce illegal immigration in your sector to O.  

[*Nately120*]

(10-01-2019, 10:50 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: In a new book, it is being revealed that in addition to calling for migrants legs to be shot at, Trump said the wall would be electrified, have flesh piercing spikes at the top, and have a moat with alligators or snakes ...

https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2019/10/01/donald-trump-migrants-snakes-alligators-trench-nyt-sot-vpx-tsr.cnn

I assume he's mostly joking, but I can't tell.  Trump has reached the level of John Lennon at his "I can do whatever I want and my fans will declare it genius" period.  I wish Trump would give his next speech with Melania knitting while blindfolded so Trump's fans can tell us why that makes him the most bold genius there is,

[GMDino]

Maybe THIS is why no one sees any walls being built along the border...he's building it in Colorado.  

When you're in Pennsylvania saying there's a wall in Colorado that's supposed to be in Arizona but actually doesn't exist anywhere https://t.co/O2Sph87WjQ

— PA Democratic Party (@PADems) October 23, 2019

[GMDino]

Why are crying?  He was just "kidding"? Now go make him a sandwich and he won't hit you again.

(Kiddingly) We’re building a Wall in Colorado”(then stated, “we’re not building a Wall in Kansas but they get the benefit of the Wall we’re building on the Border”) refered to people in the very packed auditorium, from Colorado & Kansas, getting the benefit of the Border Wall!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) October 24, 2019