it works. confusing to the public when you hear two very different things coming out of the white house. playing sound from the president saying that and take a listen to mulvaney and then comment on it. go ahead, guys. what we save on the usmca, what we save on that, just with mexico will pay for the wall many times over. we will be taking in more money as part of our relationship with mexico and that could be available to us to build the wall. now, it still requires appropriation as does all money. if mexico actually wrote us a check, it could still have to go into treasury and be appropriated by congress. that s how our system works. different than what the president was actually just saying. right. they should probably get on the same page over that. the other difficulty, too, in the negotiation process for all of this is that no one is on the same page with one another. you have jared kushner essentially putting daca back into this agreement like has been reported. you
until you get the funding for the wall. these federal workers want the wall. the president is now taunting democrats in a tweet by claiming without evidence that most of the 800,000 federal workers affected by the shutdown are democrats. that comment prompted backlash from one. largest unions rpg federal employ eds. the head of the american federation of government employees writing in a statement a government shutdown doesn t hurt any one political party or any one federal employee more than another. it hurts all of them. it hurts their families and it hurts all of our communities. the president doesn t appear to be budging from his starting position. whatever it takes. i mean, we re going to have a wall. we re going to have safety. reporter: today white house press secretary sarah sanders doubled down saying in it a statement the president does not want the government to remain shut down, but he ll not sign a proposal that does not first prioritize our country s safety and secu
president, he s sort of throwing things at the wall so to speak and trying to see what sticks. this afternoon he put up a new tweet saying this isn t about the wall. everyone knows that a wall will work perfectly. he says this is only about the democrats not letting president trump and the republicans have a win. they may have the ten senate votes, but we have the issue, border security, 2020. what do you make that have? i mean, it sounds as though he says it s not about the wall when really it is about the wall. what wall are we even talking about at this point, jim? are we talking about the game of thrones season one 2013 that he issued last week? are we talking about a continuation of the existing 700 miles or so of fence and funding for that, or are we talking about the bead curtain that speaker pelosi referenced just yesterday? it s unclear what version of the wall the president is going for, and it s worth noting, jim, this is not just about democrats. there are members of th
about, and, yes, expect more volatility as we get to the final trading day of 2018. jim? alison kosik, thanks investment joining us in the situation room is democratic congressman jerry conleyly, a member of the foreign affairs and oversight committees. thanks for joining us. happy holidays. as the government shutdown, it and we saw phil mattingly talk about this a few moments ago there, aren t any lawmakers up on capitol hill. we ll talk responsibility for you since you re here in the studio with us, but it doesn t seem like there s any end in sight to all of this, and the president was tweeting earlier today we can show some of this on the screen, we won t read the hole thing, but he did blame democrats and their obstruction of the desperately needed wall as he calls it for what s happening right now? the president and his acolytes mark meadows who were on the previous program are engaged actively in revisionist history. remember a little over a week ago a clean funding bill
government passed the senate unanimously without any fuss about a wall, and and we were told the white house would sign it, and and what happened? a couple of talking heads, right wing talking heads, laura ingraham, sean hannity and rush limbaugh and the freedom caucus led by my friend mark meadows went and threatened the revolt, that he would lose support, he trump, if he signed anything without a wall, and the white house did a complete about-face based on that because that s what he watches consistently, fox news, and and so he said i won t sign anything about $5 billion for my wall, a wall, by the way, that mexico was snowed to pay for we all kind of forget, so the sburd hardly on democrats to produce something. what happened? why did the president change his mind? what and what did he have in mind in doing that, and what is it that the wall is supposed to accomplish, and to hold the