Trump's campaign website said Mexico would "make a one-time payment of $5-10 billion" https://t.co/cAJ9e5uR8z

— Ben Jacobs (@Bencjacobs) January 10, 2019

Ways that Mexico would pay for the wall, per Trump at various points:
– Writing a check or else
– Revised trade deals
– A tax
– Being cowed by not getting a meeting
– Reimbursement/other
– Getting out-dealed
https://t.co/n5FXOhLzlB

— Philip Bump (@pbump) January 10, 2019

This is another big lie, and very specifically inaccurate. His campaign’s Paying For The Wall proposal claimed Mexico was going to make a one-time payment of up to $10 billion. https://t.co/u9auji3yGM https://t.co/RICpu1epao

— Daniel Dale (@ddale8) January 10, 2019

He said they would need to make one-time payment of $5 billion to $10 billion, or he would seize remittances. That was literally his plan. https://t.co/ybOVYX1HKd

— Glenn Kessler (@GlennKesslerWP) January 10, 2019

Remember how Trump said earlier today that he never said Mexico would pay for the wall with a check? We'll you'll just never guess what Trump said on Hannity in 2016. https://t.co/t8qWlA7z5U

— Philip Bump (@pbump) January 11, 2019

1) Congress hasn’t approved the deal yet, and there’s a decent chance they won’t;
2) it’s not billions of dollars better;
3) Even if it was, it wouldn’t yield the tax revenue necessary to fund your idiotic wall. https://t.co/yUYiEghPyv

— Daniel W. Drezner (@dandrezner) January 11, 2019

“He did say it — at least 212 times during his campaign and dozens more since he took office. And he put it in writing — in a March 2016 memo to news outlets that was then posted on his campaign website.” https://t.co/pbinb81n5T

— Jenna Johnson (@wpjenna) January 11, 2019

Trump in 2016 on Mexico: "They may even write us a check."

Trump today on Mexico: "I never said they're going to write out a check." pic.twitter.com/OwgD0vyMql

— Manu Raju (@mkraju) January 10, 2019

Turns out he DID say Mexico would write a check! And his new claim that NAFTA 2.0 will “indirectly” pay for it is pure BS: Any added money from that trade deal would go only to private companies and their shareholders, NOT to the American taxpayers who’d foot the bill. https://t.co/oNXYYzHOEo

— Laurence Tribe (@tribelaw) January 11, 2019

No longer looking pay a big check, Trump says Mexico will pay for wall under new trade deal. That’s false. https://t.co/B1YuzNRT98

— Jim Acosta (@Acosta) January 11, 2019

At a Republican presidential debate in 2016, I asked @realDonaldTrump: "If you don't get an actual check from the Mexican government for $8 billion or $10 billion or $12 billion, whatever it will cost, how are you going to make them pay for the wall?" Here's his response: pic.twitter.com/i7dQea8Ehi

— Wolf Blitzer (@wolfblitzer) January 11, 2019

3 economists ran the numbers on Trump's border wall.
They found it's a bad investment.

-It reduces GDP
-It has only a tiny impact on stemming illegal immigration
-It costs more $$ to build than workers get back in the form of higher payhttps://t.co/qvJTVeUh9Z #wall

— Heather Long (@byHeatherLong) January 8, 2019

POLITICO polled the offices of 17 Senate and House members who represent Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California about Trump’s $5.7 billion border barrier request. Only two said they supported it. https://t.co/J7m74iCeri

— POLITICO (@politico) January 10, 2019

Today Trump claimed he will seize large swaths of land from private citizens at gunpoint and declare a “state of emergency” to build a wall without Congressional approval.

In the face of tyranny, Republicans are outraged … by a freshman Member of Congress using profanity.

— Renato Mariotti (@renato_mariotti) January 4, 2019

I assume this is just talk. If it’s not, Trump would be provoking a constitutional crisis that would lead to resignations of senior officials, not just civilian but also military if he sought to use the military illegally, and the start of impeachment proceedings. https://t.co/oSJSMzaZJC

— Bill Kristol (@BillKristol) January 5, 2019

.@MichaelSteele: People just put your pants back on and calm down. The fact of the matter is, there is no national emergency… No terrorists are coming across the Mexican border… We've got to get #Trump out of our head when it comes to this issue. #AMJoy pic.twitter.com/qhkqbrjE1P

— AM Joy w/Joy Reid (@amjoyshow) January 5, 2019

Emergency powers offer a broad array of tools that would otherwise be unavailable to the executive branch. Some are highly potent and subject to abuse, while others are already being misused as convenient fixes to non-emergency problems. https://t.co/8iTLx6m1L9

— Brennan Center (@BrennanCenter) January 5, 2019

A core principle of the Tea Party and the broader “constitutional conservative” movement has always been that if he wants to the president can declare a state of emergency and undertake an illegal $20 billion construction project complete with seizures of private land.

— Matthew Yglesias (@mattyglesias) January 5, 2019

President Trump apparently imagines that declaring a national emergency to get his border wall built would allow him to govern by barking commands rather than by throwing tantrums. https://t.co/3bQTdMwfZb

— The New Yorker (@NewYorker) January 5, 2019

No, @realDonaldTrump, you can’t declare “emergency” to build vanity wall. BTW, want to know what’s a real emergency? Poverty & inequality in America. 4 in 10 don’t have $400 to deal w/ emergency. 3 richest ppl have as much wealth as bottom 50%. Shameful. https://t.co/QA6UDRqQZj

— Rep. Pramila Jayapal (@RepJayapal) January 5, 2019

Factual basis for a national emergency:

-Violent crime DROPPED according to latest FBI data.

-Property crime also DROPPED.

-Immigrants, both documented a
& undocumented, commit LESS CRIME than native-born Americans.

Courts would strike down this @realDonaldTrump power grab. https://t.co/sCNKBmCLIl

— Ted Lieu (@tedlieu) January 4, 2019

President Trump, yesterday: "We can call a national emergency….I may do it….I am allowed to do that."
Well, it's reassuring that the Justice Department is under the control of a respected and Senate-confirmed attorney general who'd never acquiesce in something like this.

— Bill Kristol (@BillKristol) January 5, 2019

If POTUS is willing to continue the shutdown for “months, even years,” isn’t he conceding that building a wall really isn’t an emergency? 🤔

— Asha Rangappa (@AshaRangappa_) January 5, 2019

When you push reckless policies that squander our resources, defy our values, leave 800,000 federal workers unpaid and millions of Americans without needed services, you don’t need to declare a national emergency.

You are the national emergency.

— Adam Schiff (@AdamSchiff) January 4, 2019

Having covered the Tea Party very closely, I just tried to imagine the reaction if Obama threatened to use emergency powers like this, and my head exploded. https://t.co/roHofVh1Uz

— Dave Weigel (@daveweigel) January 5, 2019