Uncategorized
Trump, Pelosi remain far apart on the border wall issue
WASHINGTON — House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has declared that there’ll be no “wall money” in any compromise border security deal as she and President Donald Trump
Trump, who in recent weeks has expressed indifference to whether the term “wall” or something else is used, clung with renewed tenacity to the word that became his campaign mantra, declaring, “A wall is a wall.” Yet in a series of tweets and statements, he issued conflicting messages about what he’d need to declare victory and suggested that merely repairing existing structures along the boundary could be a major component of a triumph.
Amid signs that Trump’s leverage in Congress is atrophying, he seemed to aim one tweet at his conservative followers. He wrote that Democrats “are not going to give money to build the DESPERATELY needed WALL. I’ve got you covered. Wall is already being built, I don’t expect much help!”
Pelosi, D-Calif., left the door open for an accord that could finance some barriers, citing what she said was already existing “Normandy fencing” that blocks vehicles.
“If the president wants to call that a wall, he can call that a wall,” she told reporters Thursday. She added: “Is there a place for enhanced fencing? Normandy fencing would work.”
Yet Pelosi’s other remark — “There’s not going to be any wall money in the legislation” — underscored the linguistic battle underway. It also showed that Democrats see no reason to let Trump claim a win in a cause that stirs his hard-right voters and enrages liberals.
Trump’s political muscle weakened following Democrats’ capture of House control in the November election. It waned further after his surrender last week in ending a record 35-day partial government shutdown without getting a penny of the $5.7 billion he’d demanded to start building the wall.
In another sign of his flagging hold over lawmakers, the GOP-controlled Senate backed legislation on a 68-23 vote Thursday that opposes withdrawal of U.S. troops from Syria and Afghanistan.
When Trump folded on the shutdown, he agreed to reopen government until Feb. 15, giving lawmakers more time to craft a bipartisan border security compromise.
If there’s no deal by then, Trump has threatened to revive the shutdown or declare a national emergency, which he claims would let him shift billions from unrelated military construction projects to erecting his wall. He criticized Democrats’ negotiating stance so far, telling reporters in the Oval Office that Pelosi is “just playing games” and saying GOP bargainers are “wasting their time.”
Democrats remain united against those tactics. Republican opposition seems nearly as strong, and GOP leaders are becoming increasingly assertive about publicly telegraphing those feelings to Trump.
Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, told reporters that “there are a lot of us that are trying to dissuade” Trump from declaring a national emergency should border security talks deadlock. Cornyn, a close adviser to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, said he has “absolute confidence” that such a declaration would be challenged in court, tying up the money, and said Congress might even vote to defy him.
“The president needs to know that before he heads down that path,” Cornyn said.
No. 2 Senate GOP leader John Thune of South Dakota told reporters that “a lot of folks are uncomfortable” with an emergency declaration. He stopped short of ruling out a challenge by the Senate, calling the question “hypothetical.”
Earlier this week, McConnell, R-Ky., a longtime opponent of shutdowns, called the move “government dysfunction which should be embarrassing to everyone on a bipartisan basis.”
Lawmakers caution that if Trump declares an emergency, future Democratic presidents might do the same for issues they
Democrats offered further details of their border security plan Thursday, unveiling a measure that would provide no wall funds.
It would significantly boost spending for scanners at ports of entry, humanitarian aid for apprehended migrants, and new aircraft and ships to police the U.S.-Mexico border. It would freeze the number of border patrol agents and block any wall construction in wildlife refuges along the border.
Without a border security accord, lawmakers could avert another shutdown by once again temporarily financing dozens of federal agencies, perhaps for months.
Trump has been unpredictable in the shutdown debate, mixing softer rhetoric about a multifaceted approach to border security with campaign-style bluster about the wall. Lawmakers negotiating the bill are aware that he could quash an agreement at any time, plunging them back into crisis.
“Obviously, it makes it more challenging,” Cornyn told reporters. “You keep talking and try to understand where he is and try to work it out.”
___
Associated Press writer Colleen Long contributed to this report.
Alan Fram And Andrew Taylor, The Associated Press
From the Daily Caller News Foundation
By Jason Hopkins
The Trump administration is creating a first-of-its-kind task force aimed at ushering in a new “Golden Age” of beautiful infrastructure across the U.S.
The Department of Transportation (DOT) will announce the establishment of the Beautifying Transportation Infrastructure Council (BTIC) on Thursday, the Daily Caller News Foundation exclusively learned. The BTIC seeks to advise Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy on design and policy ideas for key infrastructure projects, including highways, bridges and transit hubs.
“What happened to our country’s proud tradition of building great, big, beautiful things?” Duffy said in a statement shared with the DCNF. “It’s time the design for America’s latest infrastructure projects reflects our nation’s strength, pride, and promise.”
“We’re engaging the best and brightest minds in architectural design and engineering to make beautiful structures that move you and bring about a new Golden Age of Transportation,” Duffy continued.
Mini scoop – here is the DOT’s rollout of its Beautifying Transportation Infrastructure Council, which will be tasked with making our buildings beautiful again. pic.twitter.com/
9iV2xSxdJM — Jason Hopkins (@jasonhopkinsdc) October 23, 2025
The DOT is encouraging nominations of the country’s best architects, urban planners, artists and others to serve on the council, according to the department. While ensuring that efficiency and safety remain a top priority, the BTIC will provide guidance on projects that “enhance” public areas and develop aesthetic performance metrics.
The new council aligns with an executive order signed by President Donald Trump in August 2025 regarding infrastructure. The “Making Federal Architecture Beautiful Again” order calls for federal public buildings in the country to “respect regional architectural heritage” and aims to prevent federal construction projects from using modernist and brutalist architecture styles, instead returning to a classical style.
“The Founders, in line with great societies before them, attached great importance to Federal civic architecture,” Trump’s order stated. “They wanted America’s public buildings to inspire the American people and encourage civic virtue.”
“President George Washington and Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson consciously modeled the most important buildings in Washington, D.C., on the classical architecture of ancient Athens and Rome,” the order continued. “Because of their proven ability to meet these requirements, classical and traditional architecture are preferred modes of architectural design.”
The DOT invested millions in major infrastructure projects since Trump’s return to the White House. Duffy announced in August a $43 million transformation initiative of the New York Penn Station in New York City and in September unveiledmajor progress in the rehabilitation and modernization of Washington Union Station in Washington, D.C.
The BTIC will comprise up to 11 members who will serve two-year terms, with the chance to be reappointed, according to the DOT. The task force will meet biannually. The deadline for nominations will end Nov. 21.
The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms has released a new report titled Canada’s Surrender of Sovereignty: New WHO health regulations undermine Canadian democracy and Charter freedoms. Authored by Nigel Hannaford, a veteran journalist and researcher, the report warns that Canada’s acceptance of the World Health Organization’s (WHO) revised International Health Regulations (IHR) represents a serious erosion of national independence and democratic accountability.
The IHR amendments, which took effect on September 19, 2025, authorize the WHO Director-General to declare global “health emergencies” that could require Canada to follow directives from bureaucrats in Geneva, bypassing the House of Commons and the will of Canadian voters.
The WHO regards these regulations as “binding,” despite having no ability or legal authority to impose such regulations. Even so, Canada is opting to accept the regulations as binding.
By accepting the WHO’s revised IHR, the report explains, Canada has relinquished its own control over future health crises and instead has agreed to let the WHO determine when a “pandemic emergency” exists and what Canada must do to respond to it, after which Canada must report back to the WHO.
In fact, under these International Health Regulations, the WHO could demand countries like Canada impose stringent freedom-violating health policies, such as lockdowns, vaccine mandates, or travel restrictions without debate, evidence review, or public accountability, the report explains.
Once the WHO declares a “Pandemic Emergency,” member states are obligated to implement such emergency measures “without delay” for a minimum of three months.
Importantly, following these WHO directives would undermine government accountability as politicians may hide behind international “commitments” to justify their actions as “simply following international rules,” the report warns.
Canada should instead withdraw from the revised IHR, following the example of countries like Germany, Austria, Italy, Czech Republic, and the United States. The report recommends continued international cooperation without surrendering control over domestic health policies.
Constitutional lawyer Allison Pejovic said, “[b]y treating WHO edicts as binding, the federal government has effectively placed Canadian sovereignty on loan to an unelected international body.”
“Such directives, if enforced, would likely violate Canadians’ Charter rights and freedoms,” she added.
Mr. Hannaford agreed, saying, “Canada’s health policies must be made in Canada. No free and democratic nation should outsource its emergency powers to unelected bureaucrats in Geneva.”
The Justice Centre urges Canadians to contact their Members of Parliament and demand they support withdrawing from the revised IHR to restore Canadian sovereignty and reject blind compliance with WHO directives.
It’s time for Canada to remember, the heroes of Kapyong
McKinsey outlook for 2025 sharply adjusts prior projections, predicting fossil fuels will dominate well after 2050
Trump: Americans to receive $2,000 each from tariff revenue
CBC cashes in on Carney as the news industry playing field tilts further in its favour, crippling the competition
Carney’s Floor-Crossing Campaign. A Media-Staged Bid for Majority Rule That Erodes Democracy While Beijing Hovers
The Canadian Food Inspection Agency’s Bloodlust for Ostriches: Part 2
Why Do Some Armed Forces Suffer More Suicides Than Others?
-
Addictions1 day agoCanadian gov’t not stopping drug injection sites from being set up near schools, daycares
-
Business1 day agoParliamentary Budget Officer begs Carney to cut back on spending
-
Business1 day agoCarney government needs stronger ‘fiscal anchors’ and greater accountability
-
Education1 day agoWhy classroom size isn’t the issue teacher unions think it is
-
Fraser Institute2 days agoCourts and governments caused B.C.’s property crisis—they’re not about to fix it
-
Alberta1 day agoChatGPT may explain why gap between report card grades and standardized test scores is getting bigger
-
Alberta1 day agoFederal budget: It’s not easy being green
-
Energy16 hours agoIt should not take a crisis for Canada to develop the resources that make people and communities thrive.