Top Republican lawmakers on Sunday warned against Donald <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/trump-stops-short-of-emergency-declaration-in-border-wall-fight-189699">Trump declaring a national emergency</a> to secure funds for a border wall, signalling doubts within the president's party as a government shutdown was set to enter the fourth workweek.

Senator Ron Johnson, chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, told CNN that he would "hate" to see Trump invoke emergency powers for a wall.

"If we do that, it's going to go to court and the wall won't get built," he said. And Representative Steve Scalise, the No. 2 House Republican, told ABC, "We don't want it to come down to a national emergency declaration," even if he believes Trump has the authority to do so.

Trump only recently backed away from talk of an<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/pompeo-hopes-for-imminent-end-to-us-government-shutdown-190082"> emergency declaration</a>, after pressing it for days as a way out of the continuing budget standoff.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/trump-says-record-long-government-shutdown-could-be-resolved-in-15-minutes-189918">Democrats</a> have strongly opposed the idea. The No. 2 Senate Democrat, Dick Durbin, said Sunday on ABC that "if this president is going to turn to national emergencies every time he disagrees with Congress, I'm against it." He urged Trump to "put an end to the shutdown and put everything on the table." As the partisan battle drags on, the effects of the partial shutdown have become steadily clearer, and new polls show growing public dissatisfaction.

On Sunday, Trump acknowledged, at least indirectly, the mounting costs of the shutdown.

"The damage done to our Country from a badly broken Border - Drugs, Crime and so much that is bad - is far greater than a Shutdown, which the Dems can easily fix as soon as they come back to Washington!" he said. Many lawmakers spent the weekend in their home states -- often hearing constituents' complaints about the shutdown -- but will return to Washington on Monday.

Trump has tried various angles to pressure Democratic negotiators, but they have not visibly budged from an offer to support some border security spending -- the figure of $1.3 billion has been floated -- but not the $5.7 billion he wants for a wall.

Two new polls indicate the Democrats may be winning the battle for public support.

The Washington Post/ABC News survey found that far more Americans blame Trump and the Republicans for the shutdown than blame the Democrats -- by 53 per cent to 29 per cent.

Meantime, a separate poll by CNN showed Trump's disapproval rating among Americans had climbed by five points -- to 57 per cent -- in just a month, with just 37 per cent approving.

But the Post poll also found a hardening of Republican support for a wall, with 70 per cent now saying they strongly support the wall, up from 58 per cent a year earlier.

The president has closely tied his fate to his steadfast conservative base.

Many Republicans doubt that the invocation of a national emergency would help their cause -- likely influencing Trump's decision Friday to say he was holding off in order to give Democrats more time to strike a deal. "I want to give them the chance to see if they can act responsibly," he told Fox in an interview late Saturday.

Trump has acknowledged that an emergency declaration would likely trigger a legal battle ending in the Supreme Court.

Opponents say such a unilateral presidential move would be a constitutional overreach and set a dangerous precedent.

The partial shutdown became the longest on record at midnight Friday when it overtook a 21-day stretch in 1995-1996 under president Bill Clinton.

The impasse has paralyzed Washington -- its impact felt increasingly around the country -- with the president refusing to sign off on budgets for swaths of government departments unrelated to the dispute.

As a result, 800,000 federal employees -- including FBI agents, air traffic controllers and museum staff -- received no paychecks on Friday. Both Democrats and Republicans agree that the US-Mexican border presents challenges, but Trump has turned his single-minded push for more walls into a crusade.

He tweeted Sunday that "The building of the Wall on the Southern Border will bring down the crime rate throughout the entire Country!" Some studies show that illegal immigrants commit fewer crimes than people born in the United States.

Only in recent days has Trump begun describing the problem as "humanitarian," referring in a tweet Saturday to "a massive Humanitarian Crisis at our Southern Border."&nbsp;

Top Republican lawmakers on Sunday warned against Donald Trump declaring a national emergency to secure funds for a border wall, signalling doubts within the president's party as a government shutdown was set to enter the fourth workweek.

Top Republican lawmakers on Sunday warned against Donald Trump declaring a national emergency to secure funds for a border wall, signalling doubts within the president's party as a government shutdown was set to enter the fourth workweek. Senator Ron Johnson, chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, told CNN that he would "hate" to see Trump invoke emergency powers for a wall. "If we do that, it's going to go to court and the wall won't get built," he said. And Representative Steve Scalise, the No. 2 House Republican, told ABC, "We don't want it to come down to a national emergency declaration," even if he believes Trump has the authority to do so. Trump only recently backed away from talk of an emergency declaration, after pressing it for days as a way out of the continuing budget standoff. Democrats have strongly opposed the idea. The No. 2 Senate Democrat, Dick Durbin, said Sunday on ABC that "if this president is going to turn to national emergencies every time he disagrees with Congress, I'm against it." He urged Trump to "put an end to the shutdown and put everything on the table." As the partisan battle drags on, the effects of the partial shutdown have become steadily clearer, and new polls show growing public dissatisfaction. On Sunday, Trump acknowledged, at least indirectly, the mounting costs of the shutdown. "The damage done to our Country from a badly broken Border - Drugs, Crime and so much that is bad - is far greater than a Shutdown, which the Dems can easily fix as soon as they come back to Washington!" he said. Many lawmakers spent the weekend in their home states -- often hearing constituents' complaints about the shutdown -- but will return to Washington on Monday. Trump has tried various angles to pressure Democratic negotiators, but they have not visibly budged from an offer to support some border security spending -- the figure of $1.3 billion has been floated -- but not the $5.7 billion he wants for a wall. Two new polls indicate the Democrats may be winning the battle for public support. The Washington Post/ABC News survey found that far more Americans blame Trump and the Republicans for the shutdown than blame the Democrats -- by 53 per cent to 29 per cent. Meantime, a separate poll by CNN showed Trump's disapproval rating among Americans had climbed by five points -- to 57 per cent -- in just a month, with just 37 per cent approving. But the Post poll also found a hardening of Republican support for a wall, with 70 per cent now saying they strongly support the wall, up from 58 per cent a year earlier. The president has closely tied his fate to his steadfast conservative base. Many Republicans doubt that the invocation of a national emergency would help their cause -- likely influencing Trump's decision Friday to say he was holding off in order to give Democrats more time to strike a deal. "I want to give them the chance to see if they can act responsibly," he told Fox in an interview late Saturday. Trump has acknowledged that an emergency declaration would likely trigger a legal battle ending in the Supreme Court. Opponents say such a unilateral presidential move would be a constitutional overreach and set a dangerous precedent. The partial shutdown became the longest on record at midnight Friday when it overtook a 21-day stretch in 1995-1996 under president Bill Clinton. The impasse has paralyzed Washington -- its impact felt increasingly around the country -- with the president refusing to sign off on budgets for swaths of government departments unrelated to the dispute. As a result, 800,000 federal employees -- including FBI agents, air traffic controllers and museum staff -- received no paychecks on Friday. Both Democrats and Republicans agree that the US-Mexican border presents challenges, but Trump has turned his single-minded push for more walls into a crusade. He tweeted Sunday that "The building of the Wall on the Southern Border will bring down the crime rate throughout the entire Country!" Some studies show that illegal immigrants commit fewer crimes than people born in the United States. Only in recent days has Trump begun describing the problem as "humanitarian," referring in a tweet Saturday to "a massive Humanitarian Crisis at our Southern Border."

Top Republicans oppose border 'emergency' as shutdown drags on

By Chris Edelson

If President Donald Trump declares a national emergency to fund some portion of a wall along the US-Mexico border without congressional authorisation, what would happen next?

Would the courts step in? What is Congress’ role?

As I explain in my book “Emergency Presidential Power,” presidents generally claim emergency power in two ways: through inherent or implied authority under the US Constitution or under statutory authority granted by Congress.

Relying on the Constitution as a basis for emergency power is controversial, and less likely to stand up to meaningful congressional or judicial review. The US Constitution says nothing specific about presidential emergency power: Presidents can only claim such authority is implied or inherent.

The emergency powers the Constitution does describe are actually assigned to Congress. Congress has delegated some emergency powers to the president through statutes, including the National Emergencies Act. But Congress retains the power to reject a president’s declaration of a national emergency.

If President Trump does declare an emergency, the question is: Will Congress use the power available to it, or will it play the role of the passive spectator?

Gaining congressional approval

Since presidents lack any specific constitutional emergency power, they often find it necessary to gain congressional authorisation. For instance, at the start of the Civil War, with Congress out of session, President Abraham Lincoln suspended habeas corpus and took other unilateral actions. He later sought and gained retroactive approval from Congress for these actions.

This precedent of gaining congressional approval was put to the test nearly 100 years later. In 1952, President Harry Truman claimed emergency power to take control of steel factories during the Korean War in response to a labour strike. He invoked a “very great inherent power to meet great national emergencies.” Congress took no specific action to approve or disapprove, though a pre-existing statute on the books weighed against Truman.

When factory owners sued the administration, the Supreme Court, by a 6-3 vote, ruled against Truman in the famous Youngstown Sheet decision. Justice Robert H. Jackson’s concurring opinion, in that case, has been especially influential and is often cited by legal scholars and judges. He outlined a three-part test to be used as a starting point in determining when presidential action is constitutionally permissible.

Under Jackson’s test, presidents are on the strongest possible footing when acting with congressional approval. In this case, Jackson said, Truman’s position was weak since he was taking action that did not comply with the relevant legislative framework. In Jackson’s view, Truman’s reliance on inherent emergency power under the Constitution would dangerously concentrate power in the president’s hands, something the framers would not have wanted.

Congress’s role

Jackson’s opinion in Youngstown suggested that emergency power could be defined by Congress in statutes.

Congress took up that suggestion with the National Emergencies Act of 1976. Though the act was designed to set limits on presidential power to declare national emergencies of indefinite length, it has ended up providing a largely unregulated way for presidents to take unilateral action. Congress has failed to fulfill its responsibilities under the law.

The National Emergencies Act permits the president to declare a national emergency without congressional approval, triggering specific statutory powers that the president can use. For instance, presidents have used this law to impose economic sanctions against terrorists after 9/11 or regulate foreign ships in U.S. waters. Thirty-one emergency declarations are currently in effect under the statute.

Congress can vote at any time to terminate a state of emergency, and is required by the statute to meet every six months while an emergency is in effect to consider whether it should continue. However, it has never voted on an emergency declared by a president or held meetings as required by the statute.

Perhaps most importantly for Trump, the National Emergencies Act provides no criteria for deciding whether a national emergency exists. We know from history that presidents can contrive emergencies as a pretext for action.

For example, in 1846 President James Polk falsely claimed that Mexico had spilled American blood on US soil as a pretext for gaining a declaration of war from Congress.

In 1942, President Franklin D Roosevelt justified the decision to intern 110,000 Japanese-Americans without trial based on false claims that time was of the essence, and at least some Japanese-Americans were known to be disloyal.

Although both of these examples pre-date the 1976 Act, they serve as cautionary tales about the wisdom of accepting at face value a president’s claim that an emergency exists. However, because the law now in effect provides no specific standards to define the existence of an emergency, courts might be inclined to defer to presidential discretion. If President Trump declares a national emergency at the border, it is far from clear that courts would strike it down.

By contrast, it would be straightforward for Congress to reverse a declaration of national emergency. The National Emergencies Act gives legislators authority to reject a presidential declaration of national emergency through simple legislation that would require majorities in the House and Senate. President Trump would presumably veto such action. Legislators would have the opportunity to override a presidential veto with a two-thirds majority vote. That, of course, would be no easy task in the current Congress.

Because of the way the National Emergencies Act was drafted, Congress is better positioned to take action than the courts – assuming enough members are moved to act. If Congress does nothing, then the law could become a vehicle for presidential abuse, especially because the act’s language seems to grant the president broad discretion that could insulate an emergency declaration from legal challenge. If the president moves ahead with a controversial plan to declare a national emergency as a way to free up money for construction of a border wall, all eyes should be on Congress.

(Chris Edelson is Assistant Professor of Government, American University School of Public Affairs)

(This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/if-trump-declares-a-national-emergency-could-congress-or-the-courts-reverse-it-109752">original article)</a>

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

&nbsp;

By Chris Edelson If President Donald Trump declares a national emergency to fund some portion of a wall along the US-Mexico border without congressional authorisation, what would happen next?

By Chris Edelson If President Donald Trump declares a national emergency to fund some portion of a wall along the US-Mexico border without congressional authorisation, what would happen next? Would the courts step in? What is Congress’ role? As I explain in my book “Emergency Presidential Power,” presidents generally claim emergency power in two ways: through inherent or implied authority under the US Constitution or under statutory authority granted by Congress. Relying on the Constitution as a basis for emergency power is controversial, and less likely to stand up to meaningful congressional or judicial review. The US Constitution says nothing specific about presidential emergency power: Presidents can only claim such authority is implied or inherent. The emergency powers the Constitution does describe are actually assigned to Congress. Congress has delegated some emergency powers to the president through statutes, including the National Emergencies Act. But Congress retains the power to reject a president’s declaration of a national emergency. If President Trump does declare an emergency, the question is: Will Congress use the power available to it, or will it play the role of the passive spectator? Gaining congressional approval Since presidents lack any specific constitutional emergency power, they often find it necessary to gain congressional authorisation. For instance, at the start of the Civil War, with Congress out of session, President Abraham Lincoln suspended habeas corpus and took other unilateral actions. He later sought and gained retroactive approval from Congress for these actions. This precedent of gaining congressional approval was put to the test nearly 100 years later. In 1952, President Harry Truman claimed emergency power to take control of steel factories during the Korean War in response to a labour strike. He invoked a “very great inherent power to meet great national emergencies.” Congress took no specific action to approve or disapprove, though a pre-existing statute on the books weighed against Truman. When factory owners sued the administration, the Supreme Court, by a 6-3 vote, ruled against Truman in the famous Youngstown Sheet decision. Justice Robert H. Jackson’s concurring opinion, in that case, has been especially influential and is often cited by legal scholars and judges. He outlined a three-part test to be used as a starting point in determining when presidential action is constitutionally permissible. Under Jackson’s test, presidents are on the strongest possible footing when acting with congressional approval. In this case, Jackson said, Truman’s position was weak since he was taking action that did not comply with the relevant legislative framework. In Jackson’s view, Truman’s reliance on inherent emergency power under the Constitution would dangerously concentrate power in the president’s hands, something the framers would not have wanted. Congress’s role Jackson’s opinion in Youngstown suggested that emergency power could be defined by Congress in statutes. Congress took up that suggestion with the National Emergencies Act of 1976. Though the act was designed to set limits on presidential power to declare national emergencies of indefinite length, it has ended up providing a largely unregulated way for presidents to take unilateral action. Congress has failed to fulfill its responsibilities under the law. The National Emergencies Act permits the president to declare a national emergency without congressional approval, triggering specific statutory powers that the president can use. For instance, presidents have used this law to impose economic sanctions against terrorists after 9/11 or regulate foreign ships in U.S. waters. Thirty-one emergency declarations are currently in effect under the statute. Congress can vote at any time to terminate a state of emergency, and is required by the statute to meet every six months while an emergency is in effect to consider whether it should continue. However, it has never voted on an emergency declared by a president or held meetings as required by the statute. Perhaps most importantly for Trump, the National Emergencies Act provides no criteria for deciding whether a national emergency exists. We know from history that presidents can contrive emergencies as a pretext for action. For example, in 1846 President James Polk falsely claimed that Mexico had spilled American blood on US soil as a pretext for gaining a declaration of war from Congress. In 1942, President Franklin D Roosevelt justified the decision to intern 110,000 Japanese-Americans without trial based on false claims that time was of the essence, and at least some Japanese-Americans were known to be disloyal. Although both of these examples pre-date the 1976 Act, they serve as cautionary tales about the wisdom of accepting at face value a president’s claim that an emergency exists. However, because the law now in effect provides no specific standards to define the existence of an emergency, courts might be inclined to defer to presidential discretion. If President Trump declares a national emergency at the border, it is far from clear that courts would strike it down. By contrast, it would be straightforward for Congress to reverse a declaration of national emergency. The National Emergencies Act gives legislators authority to reject a presidential declaration of national emergency through simple legislation that would require majorities in the House and Senate. President Trump would presumably veto such action. Legislators would have the opportunity to override a presidential veto with a two-thirds majority vote. That, of course, would be no easy task in the current Congress. Because of the way the National Emergencies Act was drafted, Congress is better positioned to take action than the courts – assuming enough members are moved to act. If Congress does nothing, then the law could become a vehicle for presidential abuse, especially because the act’s language seems to grant the president broad discretion that could insulate an emergency declaration from legal challenge. If the president moves ahead with a controversial plan to declare a national emergency as a way to free up money for construction of a border wall, all eyes should be on Congress. (Chris Edelson is Assistant Professor of Government, American University School of Public Affairs) (This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

US-Mexico wall: If Trump declares a national emergency, could Congress or the courts reverse it?

President Donald Trump headed Thursday to the US-Mexico border to push his demand for a wall, a day after he walked out of negotiations with Democrats in a political crisis paralyzing the government.

Trump departed the White House en route for Texas, where he was expected to visit the community of McAllen and meet with local border patrol agents.

"We want a secure country," Trump told journalists just before departing.

The Texas trip gives Trump yet another high-profile stage to push his wall plan, following a national television address Tuesday and his drama-filled abandonment of talks with Democratic opponents on Wednesday.

Trump wants $5.7 billion for construction of a wall that he says is needed to stop a violent crime crisis caused by an unsecure border. Democrats say the wall would not solve real US immigration problems and is being promoted as a gimmick to satisfy the president's right-wing base.

Trump has tried to pressure Congress by refusing to sign off on a host of unrelated, normally uncontroversial government spending, resulting in a partial government shutdown. Hundreds of thousands of federal employees, including air traffic controllers and members of the Coast Guard, have been without pay for three weeks.

The frustrated president again repeated his threat that if the Democrats don't back down, he will declare a national emergency to give himself authority to go around Congress.

"If we don't make a deal, I think it would be very surprising to me" not to declare a national emergency, he said.

Analysts say the declaration would likely be challenged in court as a case of presidential overreach, in which case the wall still would face being blocked.

However, it would still give Trump political cover with his base by showing he'd done what he could. At that point, Trump could end the partial government shutdown.

Indicating that the impasse could drag on, Trump said that he will skip an international forum in Davos in just under two weeks "if the shutdown continues."

Temper tantrum?

Trump, who revels in telling stories about his negotiating skills as a New York real estate magnate, has not managed to get the Democrats to budge on his demand for the $5.7 billion.

On Wednesday, he invited Democratic leaders to the White House and began by asking if they would approve the wall in exchange for him ending the government shutdown. When the Democrats said no, he walked out.

"A total waste of time," Trump tweeted. "I said bye-bye, nothing else works!"

Chuck Schumer, the top Democrat in the Senate, told journalists Trump "sort of slammed the table," then "got up and walked out."

"Again, we saw a temper tantrum because he couldn't get his way," Schumer said.

Trump disputed that Thursday, saying "I didn't pound the table. That is a lie."

"I don't have temper tantrums," he said. "All of that narrative is a lie."

Illegal immigrants danger disputed

In Texas, aid workers say that people crossing the border do not present the menace that Trump claims.

"The truth is that a great number of percentage of people entering our country, asking to come in to the country, are not criminals: they are families, children, mothers, who really are asking for protection," said Sister Norma Pimentel, head of the Catholic Humanitarian Respite Center in McAllen, Texas.

"They're not coming here to hurt us but rather for us to help them."

A 23-year-old Honduran who gave his name only as Kevin said he came with his toddler-age daughter in search of a better life.

"We left because of the crime, because there is a lot of unemployment. The education system is bad and all of us, we parents, want a better future for our children," he told AFP.

President Donald Trump headed Thursday to the US-Mexico border to push his demand for a wall, a day after he walked out of negotiations with Democrats in a political crisis paralyzing the government.

President Donald Trump headed Thursday to the US-Mexico border to push his demand for a wall, a day after he walked out of negotiations with Democrats in a political crisis paralyzing the government. Trump departed the White House en route for Texas, where he was expected to visit the community of McAllen and meet with local border patrol agents. "We want a secure country," Trump told journalists just before departing. The Texas trip gives Trump yet another high-profile stage to push his wall plan, following a national television address Tuesday and his drama-filled abandonment of talks with Democratic opponents on Wednesday. Trump wants $5.7 billion for construction of a wall that he says is needed to stop a violent crime crisis caused by an unsecure border. Democrats say the wall would not solve real US immigration problems and is being promoted as a gimmick to satisfy the president's right-wing base. Trump has tried to pressure Congress by refusing to sign off on a host of unrelated, normally uncontroversial government spending, resulting in a partial government shutdown. Hundreds of thousands of federal employees, including air traffic controllers and members of the Coast Guard, have been without pay for three weeks. The frustrated president again repeated his threat that if the Democrats don't back down, he will declare a national emergency to give himself authority to go around Congress. "If we don't make a deal, I think it would be very surprising to me" not to declare a national emergency, he said. Analysts say the declaration would likely be challenged in court as a case of presidential overreach, in which case the wall still would face being blocked. However, it would still give Trump political cover with his base by showing he'd done what he could. At that point, Trump could end the partial government shutdown. Indicating that the impasse could drag on, Trump said that he will skip an international forum in Davos in just under two weeks "if the shutdown continues." Temper tantrum? Trump, who revels in telling stories about his negotiating skills as a New York real estate magnate, has not managed to get the Democrats to budge on his demand for the $5.7 billion. On Wednesday, he invited Democratic leaders to the White House and began by asking if they would approve the wall in exchange for him ending the government shutdown. When the Democrats said no, he walked out. "A total waste of time," Trump tweeted. "I said bye-bye, nothing else works!" Chuck Schumer, the top Democrat in the Senate, told journalists Trump "sort of slammed the table," then "got up and walked out." "Again, we saw a temper tantrum because he couldn't get his way," Schumer said. Trump disputed that Thursday, saying "I didn't pound the table. That is a lie." "I don't have temper tantrums," he said. "All of that narrative is a lie." Illegal immigrants danger disputed In Texas, aid workers say that people crossing the border do not present the menace that Trump claims. "The truth is that a great number of percentage of people entering our country, asking to come in to the country, are not criminals: they are families, children, mothers, who really are asking for protection," said Sister Norma Pimentel, head of the Catholic Humanitarian Respite Center in McAllen, Texas. "They're not coming here to hurt us but rather for us to help them." A 23-year-old Honduran who gave his name only as Kevin said he came with his toddler-age daughter in search of a better life. "We left because of the crime, because there is a lot of unemployment. The education system is bad and all of us, we parents, want a better future for our children," he told AFP.

Trump heads to US-Mexico border to push wall plan

The US government will begin a <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/standoff-over-trump-wall-leaves-us-govt-5-days-away-from-shutdown-184833">Christmastime shutdown </a>at midnight, as Congress adjourned Friday without passing a federal spending bill or addressing President Donald Trump's demand for money to build a border wall.

Operations for several key agencies will cease at 12:01 am Saturday, despite last-ditch talks that continued on Capitol Hill between White House officials and congressional leaders in both parties.

Trump has dug in on his demand for $5 billion for construction of a wall on the US border with Mexico. Democrats are staunchly opposed, and the absence of an elusive deal means federal funds for dozens of agencies will lapse when the clock strikes twelve.

It remained unclear how long the shutdown will last, but Trump expressed hope late Friday night that it "will not last long," after earlier saying he was ready for just that.

The optics are bad, as 800,000 federal employees will be either furloughed or forced to work without pay in the run-up to the Christmas holiday.

But the prospect of a large portion of government workers going without paychecks was not enough to spur lawmakers or the president to action.

The House of Representatives adjourned just before 7:00 pm (2300 GMT) Friday, with no moves taken to avert a shutdown, and the Senate closed up shop an hour later.&nbsp;

Both are due back in session at noon Saturday.

About three-quarters of the government, including the military and the Department of Health and Human Services, is fully funded until the end of September 2019, leaving 25 per cent unfunded as of Saturday.&nbsp;

Most NASA employees will be sent home, as will Commerce Department workers and many at the Departments of Homeland Security, Justice, Agriculture and State.

National parks will remain open, but most park staff will stay at home.&nbsp;

While most critical security functions will be operational, the effects of the budget wrangling and uncertainty have cast an air of chaos over the capital, which is also reeling from the resignation announcement Thursday by Defense Secretary Jim Mattis.

Wall Street ended its worst week in a decade with more bruising losses Friday.

And the inability of Washington to accomplish one of its most basic tasks -- keeping the government up and running -- has caused deep embarrassment and anxiety.

'Prepared' for shutdown

"It's up to the Democrats whether or not we have a shutdown tonight," Trump said earlier Friday, blaming political opponents for the crisis.

"I hope we don't," the president added, but "we're totally prepared for a very long shutdown."

Senators told reporters that congressional leaders from both parties were negotiating behind the scenes with White House officials including Vice President Mike Pence, Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, and incoming chief of staff Mick Mulvaney.

The power trio shuttled from one side of the Capitol to the other, seeking a breakthrough with Republicans and Democrats.&nbsp;

It did not come on Friday.

Should they eventually strike a deal, it could swiftly clear Congress and reach the president's desk, said Senate Republican Bob Corker.&nbsp;

"Now Republicans and Democrats both own the success or failure to fund government."

One focus of discussion was the $1.6 billion in border security funding that was a part of pending Senate legislation, number two Senate Republican John Cornyn told AFP.

But conservatives in the House would likely baulk at that figure.

"There's no agreement," Congressman Mark Meadows, chairman of the House Freedom Caucus of ultra-conservatives, told reporters as he left a closed-door meeting on the Capitol's Senate side.

"There's a whole lot of numbers being thrown around," but a maximum $1.6 billion for border security "is not acceptable."

Cornyn suggested the art of the deal was less about grandstanding and more about a logical compromise to break the impasse.

"The House is at five (billion dollars for border security), the Democrats are at zero," he said. "It doesn't sound like that's rocket science to come up with a figure."

'Hostage'&nbsp;

Trump reversed course Thursday and rejected a measure that had unanimously passed the Senate and was under House consideration.

It would have extended government funding until February 8, but contained no money for a border wall, a pet project Trump has fought for since his presidential campaign.

Democrats painted Trump as the Grinch who stole the year-end deal.

"This #shutdown is brought to you by @POTUS &amp; @HouseGOP," Congresswoman Kathleen Rice tweeted. "Instead of passing the Senate's funding bill, they decided to hold this country hostage."

With lawmakers like Meadows and prominent conservative commentators demanding that the president sticks to his campaign promises, Trump doubled down on his wall.

The House swiftly passed a bill that fulfilled the president's demands. It included $5.7 billion in wall funding and $7.8 billion in disaster relief.

But it stalled at the first hurdle in the Senate.

Trump was scheduled to fly to Florida Friday for his Christmas break, but he postponed the trip to help salvage a deal.

The US government will begin a Christmastime shutdown at midnight, as Congress adjourned Friday without passing a federal spending bill or addressing President Donald Trump's demand for money to build a border wall.

The US government will begin a Christmastime shutdown at midnight, as Congress adjourned Friday without passing a federal spending bill or addressing President Donald Trump's demand for money to build a border wall. Operations for several key agencies will cease at 12:01 am Saturday, despite last-ditch talks that continued on Capitol Hill between White House officials and congressional leaders in both parties. Trump has dug in on his demand for $5 billion for construction of a wall on the US border with Mexico. Democrats are staunchly opposed, and the absence of an elusive deal means federal funds for dozens of agencies will lapse when the clock strikes twelve. It remained unclear how long the shutdown will last, but Trump expressed hope late Friday night that it "will not last long," after earlier saying he was ready for just that. The optics are bad, as 800,000 federal employees will be either furloughed or forced to work without pay in the run-up to the Christmas holiday. But the prospect of a large portion of government workers going without paychecks was not enough to spur lawmakers or the president to action. The House of Representatives adjourned just before 7:00 pm (2300 GMT) Friday, with no moves taken to avert a shutdown, and the Senate closed up shop an hour later. Both are due back in session at noon Saturday. About three-quarters of the government, including the military and the Department of Health and Human Services, is fully funded until the end of September 2019, leaving 25 per cent unfunded as of Saturday. Most NASA employees will be sent home, as will Commerce Department workers and many at the Departments of Homeland Security, Justice, Agriculture and State. National parks will remain open, but most park staff will stay at home. While most critical security functions will be operational, the effects of the budget wrangling and uncertainty have cast an air of chaos over the capital, which is also reeling from the resignation announcement Thursday by Defense Secretary Jim Mattis. Wall Street ended its worst week in a decade with more bruising losses Friday. And the inability of Washington to accomplish one of its most basic tasks -- keeping the government up and running -- has caused deep embarrassment and anxiety. 'Prepared' for shutdown "It's up to the Democrats whether or not we have a shutdown tonight," Trump said earlier Friday, blaming political opponents for the crisis. "I hope we don't," the president added, but "we're totally prepared for a very long shutdown." Senators told reporters that congressional leaders from both parties were negotiating behind the scenes with White House officials including Vice President Mike Pence, Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, and incoming chief of staff Mick Mulvaney. The power trio shuttled from one side of the Capitol to the other, seeking a breakthrough with Republicans and Democrats. It did not come on Friday. Should they eventually strike a deal, it could swiftly clear Congress and reach the president's desk, said Senate Republican Bob Corker. "Now Republicans and Democrats both own the success or failure to fund government." One focus of discussion was the $1.6 billion in border security funding that was a part of pending Senate legislation, number two Senate Republican John Cornyn told AFP. But conservatives in the House would likely baulk at that figure. "There's no agreement," Congressman Mark Meadows, chairman of the House Freedom Caucus of ultra-conservatives, told reporters as he left a closed-door meeting on the Capitol's Senate side. "There's a whole lot of numbers being thrown around," but a maximum $1.6 billion for border security "is not acceptable." Cornyn suggested the art of the deal was less about grandstanding and more about a logical compromise to break the impasse. "The House is at five (billion dollars for border security), the Democrats are at zero," he said. "It doesn't sound like that's rocket science to come up with a figure." 'Hostage' Trump reversed course Thursday and rejected a measure that had unanimously passed the Senate and was under House consideration. It would have extended government funding until February 8, but contained no money for a border wall, a pet project Trump has fought for since his presidential campaign. Democrats painted Trump as the Grinch who stole the year-end deal. "This #shutdown is brought to you by @POTUS & @HouseGOP," Congresswoman Kathleen Rice tweeted. "Instead of passing the Senate's funding bill, they decided to hold this country hostage." With lawmakers like Meadows and prominent conservative commentators demanding that the president sticks to his campaign promises, Trump doubled down on his wall. The House swiftly passed a bill that fulfilled the president's demands. It included $5.7 billion in wall funding and $7.8 billion in disaster relief. But it stalled at the first hurdle in the Senate. Trump was scheduled to fly to Florida Friday for his Christmas break, but he postponed the trip to help salvage a deal.

US government shuts down at midnight as House adjourns with no deal

The US Senate on Wednesday night <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/standoff-over-trump-wall-leaves-us-govt-5-days-away-from-shutdown-184833">approved an emergency short-term </a>spending bill that averts a looming government shutdown, but excludes funds that President Donald Trump sought for a US-Mexico border wall.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/to-get-his-wall-trump-threatens-shutdown-of-us-government-155540">McConnell said the measure will fund</a> normal government operations at current levels through February 8 - bringing Washington a step closer to avoiding a potentially crippling closure of some federal offices over next week's coming Christmas holiday.

The bill will need to pass the House of Representatives and be signed by Trump before midnight Friday, when funding is set to expire for key agencies like the Department of Homeland Security.

Republican and Democratic leaders earlier on Wednesday gave strong signals that the stopgap, known as a continuing resolution, would pass Congress and head to the president's desk.

"It's good that our Republican colleagues in the Senate finally realised that they should not shut down the government over a wall that does not have enough support to pass the House or Senate and is not supported by a majority of the country," Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said upon the bill clearing the Senate.

White House aides told US media President Trump is inclined to sign the measure.

But it is seen as a defeat for the president, who had argued strenuously for $5 billion in new funding for a wall that he insists would check illegal immigration.

The US Senate on Wednesday night approved an emergency short-term spending bill that averts a looming government shutdown, but excludes funds that President Donald Trump sought for a US-Mexico border wall.

The US Senate on Wednesday night approved an emergency short-term spending bill that averts a looming government shutdown, but excludes funds that President Donald Trump sought for a US-Mexico border wall. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said the measure will fund normal government operations at current levels through February 8 - bringing Washington a step closer to avoiding a potentially crippling closure of some federal offices over next week's coming Christmas holiday. The bill will need to pass the House of Representatives and be signed by Trump before midnight Friday, when funding is set to expire for key agencies like the Department of Homeland Security. Republican and Democratic leaders earlier on Wednesday gave strong signals that the stopgap, known as a continuing resolution, would pass Congress and head to the president's desk. "It's good that our Republican colleagues in the Senate finally realised that they should not shut down the government over a wall that does not have enough support to pass the House or Senate and is not supported by a majority of the country," Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said upon the bill clearing the Senate. White House aides told US media President Trump is inclined to sign the measure. But it is seen as a defeat for the president, who had argued strenuously for $5 billion in new funding for a wall that he insists would check illegal immigration.

US Senate approves bill to avert government shutdown; excludes Mexico border wall funding

As the <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/standoff-over-trump-wall-leaves-us-govt-5-days-away-from-shutdown-184833">government shutdown threat looms</a>, the United States President <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/as-trump-renews-border-wall-demands-us-government-shutdown-looms-179860">Donald Trump</a> made another bid of persuasion on Twitter on Wednesday&nbsp;for his "big wall" as he argued that the wall on southern US-Mexico border will be a "beautiful", cost-effective structure which will be an "artistically designed steel slats".

"The Democrats, are saying loud and clear that they do not want to build a Concrete Wall - but we are not building a Concrete Wall, we are building artistically designed steel slats so that you can easily see through it" Trump's tweet read.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
The Democrats, are saying loud and clear that they do not want to build a Concrete Wall - but we are not building a Concrete Wall, we are building artistically designed steel slats, so that you can easily see through it....
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1075197395892404231?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 19, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

He then continued in another tweet with an admiration tone that "it will be beautiful".

"It will be beautiful and, at the same time, give our Country the security that our citizens deserve. It will go up fast and save us BILLIONS of dollars a month once completed!" Trump said on Twitter.'

Trump is demanding $5 billion as a down payment on construction of a huge wall along the US-Mexico border that he argues is the only way to keep illegal immigrants and drugs from crossing into the United States. Democrats and some Republicans argue there are less costly, more effective border controls.

Earlier this week, Trump threatened a partial government shutdown after Democrats did not agree to more than $1.3 billion in border security. He gave lawmakers five days to reach a deal by Friday or there will be a partial shutdown.

In 2016, during the presidential campaign, Trump had promised voters of big "concrete" wall. However lately he has been saying that the wall would be transparent. The structure, opposed by Democrats on the basis of policy and principles, Trump's demand has been a cornerstone of the president's efforts to crack down on illegal immigration.

 
&nbsp;

As the government shutdown threat looms, the United States President Donald Trump made another bid of persuasion on Twitter on Wednesday for his "big wall" as he argued that the wall on southern US-Mexico border will be a "beautiful", cost-effective structure which will be an "artistically designed steel slats".

As the government shutdown threat looms, the United States President Donald Trump made another bid of persuasion on Twitter on Wednesday for his "big wall" as he argued that the wall on southern US-Mexico border will be a "beautiful", cost-effective structure which will be an "artistically designed steel slats". "The Democrats, are saying loud and clear that they do not want to build a Concrete Wall - but we are not building a Concrete Wall, we are building artistically designed steel slats so that you can easily see through it" Trump's tweet read. The Democrats, are saying loud and clear that they do not want to build a Concrete Wall - but we are not building a Concrete Wall, we are building artistically designed steel slats, so that you can easily see through it.... — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 19, 2018 × He then continued in another tweet with an admiration tone that "it will be beautiful". "It will be beautiful and, at the same time, give our Country the security that our citizens deserve. It will go up fast and save us BILLIONS of dollars a month once completed!" Trump said on Twitter.' Trump is demanding $5 billion as a down payment on construction of a huge wall along the US-Mexico border that he argues is the only way to keep illegal immigrants and drugs from crossing into the United States. Democrats and some Republicans argue there are less costly, more effective border controls. Earlier this week, Trump threatened a partial government shutdown after Democrats did not agree to more than $1.3 billion in border security. He gave lawmakers five days to reach a deal by Friday or there will be a partial shutdown. In 2016, during the presidential campaign, Trump had promised voters of big "concrete" wall. However lately he has been saying that the wall would be transparent. The structure, opposed by Democrats on the basis of policy and principles, Trump's demand has been a cornerstone of the president's efforts to crack down on illegal immigration.

Mexico wall will be 'beautiful' and 'artistically designed', tweets Trump

Defense Secretary Jim Mattis has spoken with US President Donald Trump about the potential use of military funds for a border wall with Mexico, the Pentagon said on Thursday.

Trump, who last week got a fraction of the funding he wanted from Congress to fulfil a campaign promise by building the wall, suggested over the weekend that he might turn to the military for the money.

Mattis and Trump "have talked about the proposal, potentially, but, remember, securing Americans and securing the nation is of paramount importance to the secretary," Pentagon spokeswoman Dana White told reporters.

White did not provide any further details, but said these were "initial" conversations.

The $1.3 trillion spending bill passed approved by Congress last week contained $1.6 billion for six months of work on the wall. Trump had sought $25 billion for the project.

The president had threatened to veto the legislation, partly over the wall funding, but relented and signed it last Friday, saying a big increase in military spending had convinced him it was worthwhile.

Trump suggested getting funding for the wall from the military in a weekend Twitter post.

"Because of the $700 & $716 Billion Dollars gotten to rebuild our Military, many jobs are created and our Military is again rich," he wrote. "Building a great Border Wall, with drugs (poison) and enemy combatants pouring into our Country, is all about National Defense. Build WALL through M!," apparently using "M" as shorthand for "military."

Earlier this month, Trump toured the US border with Mexico and examined eight styles of walls, prototypes for the barrier he promised to build to keep out illegal immigrants and drugs.

Building the wall was a main theme of Trump`s 2016 presidential campaign. He said Mexico would pay for the wall, but the United States` southern neighbour has repeatedly said it would not.

The $1.3 trillion spending bill passed approved by Congress last week contained $1.6 billion for six months of work on the wall. Trump had sought $25 billion for the project

Defense Secretary Jim Mattis has spoken with US President Donald Trump about the potential use of military funds for a border wall with Mexico, the Pentagon said on Thursday. Trump, who last week got a fraction of the funding he wanted from Congress to fulfil a campaign promise by building the wall, suggested over the weekend that he might turn to the military for the money. Mattis and Trump "have talked about the proposal, potentially, but, remember, securing Americans and securing the nation is of paramount importance to the secretary," Pentagon spokeswoman Dana White told reporters. White did not provide any further details, but said these were "initial" conversations. The $1.3 trillion spending bill passed approved by Congress last week contained $1.6 billion for six months of work on the wall. Trump had sought $25 billion for the project. The president had threatened to veto the legislation, partly over the wall funding, but relented and signed it last Friday, saying a big increase in military spending had convinced him it was worthwhile. Trump suggested getting funding for the wall from the military in a weekend Twitter post. "Because of the $700 & $716 Billion Dollars gotten to rebuild our Military, many jobs are created and our Military is again rich," he wrote. "Building a great Border Wall, with drugs (poison) and enemy combatants pouring into our Country, is all about National Defense. Build WALL through M!," apparently using "M" as shorthand for "military." Earlier this month, Trump toured the US border with Mexico and examined eight styles of walls, prototypes for the barrier he promised to build to keep out illegal immigrants and drugs. Building the wall was a main theme of Trump`s 2016 presidential campaign. He said Mexico would pay for the wall, but the United States` southern neighbour has repeatedly said it would not.

Trump has talked to Mattis about US-Mexico wall funding - Pentagon