Exclusive–Mo Brooks: If Trump Is Interested in ‘Protecting Americans’ He Will Veto GO
Exclusive–Mo Brooks: If Trump Is Interested in ‘Protecting Americans’ He Will Veto GOP/Dem Spending Bill
February 14, 2019
John Binder
https://media.breitbart.com/media/20...ty-640x480.jpg[
Rep. Mo Brooks (R-AL) is urging President Trump to veto a spending bill put forward by establishment Republicans and Democrats, telling SiriusXM Patriot’s Breitbart News Tonight the deal is “really bad for America.”
Brooks detailed all aspects that he said make the spending package a major problem for American citizens while benefitting illegal aliens, human smugglers, child traffickers, the MS-13 Gang, and the Mexican Cartels.
LISTEN:
https://soundcloud.com/breitbart/bre...bruary-14-2019
The spending bill includes:
Trump, Brooks said, should veto the spending bill.
“If the president were to veto it, we would sustain his veto,” Brooks said. “I would certainly hope that the president will veto because it’s really bad for America. Whether he will or not, I can’t say.”
“I applaud President Trump when he does those things that helps secure our border, that helps protect the Rule of Law. This legislation does not help secure our border, it makes things worse, in my judgement.”
Brooks went on to slam the de facto amnesty provision for the illegal alien sponsors, household members, and relatives of UACs coming across the southern border and other restrictive policies that could block a national emergency declaration:
Any sanctuary city or state potentially has the authority to block the construction of any wall during this fiscal year that they don’t like or want. You’ve also got large tracks of federal government land where the president is prohibited from building a wall along the border under this legislation. With respect to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), all sorts of limitations that are in effect, amnesty for illegal aliens. [Emphasis added]
…
If you have an Unaccompanied Alien Child (UAC) in your household, then the entire household is exempt from being deported. If you’re MS-13 drug cartel, what does this tell you? The thing to do is to kidnap or get a kid, put that kid in your household and boom, you’re immune from deportation no matter how many drugs you sell or people you kill. That’s horrific. [Emphasis added]
…
Then you’ve got other language in this legislation that has the potential to restrict the ability of a president to build a wall under the emergency declaration that we anticipate tomorrow. [Emphasis added]
While urging Trump to veto the spending package, the Alabama congressman also asked voters and Trump supporters to flood the White House phone lines to voice opposition to the border deal.
“The average folks need to call and contact the White House and go crazy about this legislation,” Brooks said. “Ideally, under this circumstance, when you’re trying to get bad legislation shoved down your throat in the last second where no one in the public had an opportunity to review it or understand it, much less communicate their views to their elected officials in Washington, D.C.”
Specifically, Brooks said there are three provisions in the spending deal that could be interpreted by the courts to ultimately prevent the president from building a wall at the border through an emergency declaration.
Brooks said:
There are three different provisions … that has caused at least one attorney to express great reservation about how the courts would interpret that and about how that may or may not confine or restrict the ability of the president to do what he thinks he’s going to be able to do if he declares a national emergency. [Emphasis added]
Without this law passing, we’ve got a pretty clear picture about what the president can and cannot do, and the legal fights that we’re going to have. If this law passes, then there are uncertainties that are arising about what the president can and cannot do when he declares a national emergency. [Emphasis added]
Brooks said “nobody” in Congress has read the full text of the spending bill because it was thrown into lawmakers’ laps just an hour before they were asked to vote on it.
“Nobody knows for sure what’s in it,” Brooks said. “And certainly, the parts that we have read we’re not sure what they all mean … this legislation should be vetoed by President Trump if his interest is in protecting Americans from the problems with have from our porous southern border. And I hope he will get that advice from counsel from the people in the White House who are advising him but I fear he is not getting good advice from counsel.”
Brooks said the spending deal will lead to an amnesty for millions of illegal aliens because the bill goes to great lengths to keep illegal aliens from being deported and makes sure that newly arrived border crossers are readily resettled in the U.S.
“The longer you allow illegal aliens to stay in the United States of America, the greater the probability that they’re ultimately going to get amnesty because they’re going to have kids, some people refer to them as anchor babies, the public eventually is going to allow that sort of amnesty longterm,” Brooks said.
“The open borders Democrats believe they got a steal of a deal because they voted in the House, over 90 percent Democrats voted for it,” Brooks said. “While a significant majority of Republicans voted against it.”
Brooks blasted establishment Republicans who voted for the spending deal and who are urging Trump to sign the bill into law:
Well, you’ve got establishment Republicans, you’ve got the Koch brothers, you’ve got the United States Chamber of Commerce, you’ve got groups that want huge surges in the labor supply because it suppresses wages for workers which in return means more profits for the United States Chamber of Commerce. [Emphasis added]
Brooks said conservatives should not put much emphasis on claims that the spending bill is a win for Republicans because it exposes Democrats’ unwillingness to secure the southern border. Brooks said the spending bill is the Democrats’ “litmus test” for their open borders worldview.
Brooks said:
The Democrats have made it clear that they are for open borders, that they see this as a way to take control of the federal government by diminishing the influence of the votes of American citizens and they do that by importing large blocs of potential voters … of people who are heavily dependent on welfare which makes them the ideal pool from which Democrats get elected. [Emphasis added]
This is a litmus test issue for Democrats. It’s a gameplan that they’ve seen work extremely well in California and they’re going to try to use the same gameplan in states like Arizona, Nevada, Texas, you’re seeing that underway right now. [Emphasis added]
There is no chance that Democrats are going to give up their longterm gameplan, their longterm control of the United States of America, their longterm desire to dilute the votes of American citizens by agreeing to border security and a wall. They’re just not going to do it. [Emphasis added]
Two years ago was the time when Trump should have declared a national emergency and invoked the Pentagon to have the U.S. Military begin building the wall at the border, Brooks said.
“The president two years ago should have declared a national emergency,” Brooks said. “The president two years ago should have used statutes like 10 United States Code § 284 where he has the power to direct the United States Military to go the border and to build a wall. And there’s money, over a billion worth of funds just using that one statute.”
“How many dead Americans do you have to have for it to be a national emergency? We’re losing 50 dead Americans a day, 15,000 dead Americans a year,” Brooks said. “From illegal alien homicides coupled with drug overdoses … so how many dead Americans do you have to have? Name a national emergency that is greater than 15,000 dead Americans a year … We went to war in Iraq and Afghanistan on just 3,000 dead Americans on 9/11.”
Brooks again urged the president to veto the bill, even if his veto is overturned:
If President Trump can hear my voice, I ask him to veto it. If he’s going to get run over, let him be run over after having fought the good fight. Don’t agree to bad legislation. It might take him a few months, but in my judgement, give it three or four months of passage, and he’s going to be very upset that this legislation passed just like that out of control spending bill in the spring of 2018. He felt coerced into signing it, he did sign it, and he regretted it shortly there after. And I hope he learns from the mistake that was made. [Emphasis added]
House and Senate lawmakers have voted to pass the spending bill through to Trump’s desk, where White House aides have said the president will sign the border package.
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2...spending-bill/
