Congress

House Democrats fear Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer will sell them out on Trump’s wall.

Not 30 minutes after a group of border-state House Democrats accused Chuck Schumer of betraying them on President Donald Trump’s wall, the Senate minority leader picked up the phone to protest.

Retract your statement, Schumer urged Rep. Henry Cuellar last Thursday.

Story Continued Below

The Texas Democrat and his colleagues had expressed “alarm and opposition” to comments Schumer made about backing more funding for the border.

Schumer argued that he was firmly opposed to Trump’s wall with Mexico and would never give in so easily. But Cuellar refused the request.

“I said, ‘No, I’m not going to withdraw the letter because we don’t want you weakening House negotiations for Democrats,” Cuellar recounted of his conversation with Schumer.

House and Senate Democrats are now openly sniping at each other over Trump’s border wall, a division that could weaken their hand in critical spending talks over the coming days.

The president wants a $5 billion down payment for the wall and has threatened a partial government shutdown if he doesn’t get his way. Congress has until Friday to pass a funding bill, though Trump said late Saturday night that he is open to a short-term extension.

But while some Senate Democrats are open to funding at least part of Trump’s request, newly emboldened House Democrats want to hold the line and refuse to provide even a penny.

Indeed, House Democrats and outside liberal groups fret that Schumer — and the broader Senate Democratic conference — are going to sell them out on the wall. Progressives have already begun lashing out at Schumer for offering up $1.6 billion as the starting point for negotiations surrounding the southern structure.

House Democrats argue they never agreed to that amount. And they say it’s up to Schumer to be the last line of defense against Trump’s hard-line immigration policies until they take power in January.

“I’ve heard it from other members, and it’s my feeling as well, that he could agree to something that basically puts those of us in sincere opposition to that wall in a bind,” said Rep. Raúl Grijalva, an Arizona Democrat who also signed the Cuellar letter. “There’s already $1.5 [billion from last year]. No more.”

Schumer’s office pushed back on the notion that he and his members are undercutting the party’s negotiating strategy and accused Cuellar and his colleagues of “putting words in Schumer’s mouth and they know it.”

Senate Democrats say they are backing $1.6 billion for “border security,” not a “wall” — though technically the money would fortify miles of tall fencing along the border, which many consider a wall.

“Schumer has been clear since the beginning that he supports funding for non-wall border security — the same border security funding Rep. Cuellar voted for last year,” Schumer spokesman Justin Goodman said, adding: “This is much ado about nothing: we all agree and always have: no wall, no $5 billion. There is no dispute amongst us on this.”

Democrats may have a little more time to get on the same page.

Congress has a Friday deadline before large swaths of the federal government shut down, but Trump expressed a willingness to postpone the fight after the death of George H. W. Bush. The former president will lie in state at the Capitol for several days, complicating efforts to craft a major spending package.

GOP leaders are already discussing how to buy more time, with a one or two week delay likely.

Trump is also set to sit down with Schumer and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) on Tuesday, a meeting that for now is still on the calendar.

Meanwhile, even liberal Senate Democrats are standing by Schumer, arguing that the upper chamber’s bipartisan spending panel has already agreed to provide $1.6 billion. And when asked about criticism from progressive House lawmakers and outside groups, Senate Democrats dismissed their concerns.

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) said that “a zero demand from Sen. Schumer would have been as challenging for that [spending] process as a $5 billion wall demand from the president was.”

Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii) said calling for no border wall funding was simply a nonstarter.

“Starting at zero may not get us very far,” she said. “I understand that perspective but we want to move the ball.”

Compare that to House Democrats, who are salivating for a fight following their 40-seat romp on Election Day. The House Democratic Caucus is brimming with emboldened liberals. And with control of the lower chamber flipping in five weeks, House Democrats are trying to be relevant as soon as possible.

In was in that vein that the leaders of the House Progressive Caucus, Reps. Mark Pocan (D-Wis.) and Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), released a statement Friday urging their own leaders to “hold strong in providing zero funding for Trump’s ill-conceived border wall.”

House progressives have also privately raised their concerns with Pelosi in person. And the California Democrat assured them she will reject any new spending for the wall without significant immigration concessions, multiple lawmakers said.

Perhaps that’s why House Democrats have turned their ire on Schumer.

In the Cuellar letter to Schumer, released Thursday, a dozen Democrats from border districts told Schumer they were “alarmed” by “your comments that $1.6 billion for a physical wall along the border is the starting negotiation for the Democrats.”

“We believe the Democrats should oppose all funding for a physical wall along the U.S.-Mexico border in a FY 2019 appropriations package,” the letter said.

During their phone call, Schumer told Cuellar that the media was misconstruing what the $1.6 billion would cover, arguing that it was “border security” only. And at Schumer’s request, Cuellar later put out a statement suggesting both sides had ironed out their differences to agree no “wall” money was on the table.

But by the next day, when talking to POLITICO, it was clear that another clash might soon be around the corner.

“We had a very good conversation, Schumer and I,” Cuellar said. “He says that he did not say ‘wall money,’ and he wanted me to take my letter back, and I said, ‘I can’t do that because our position is very strong.’ We don’t want this.’”

Even House Democrats are not entirely united. Some have expressed a willingness to simply extend current funding for the Homeland Security Department since both parties disagree on what to do about the wall. But a so-called “continuing resolution” — which would maintain the status quo — would include some of the same fencing money that progressives say they now detest: This year, Congress set aside $1.3 billion to fund fencing and other border security measures.

In the end, House Democrats may not have much say in the matter. For another few weeks, the GOP-controlled House can largely steamroll Democrats. Any final deal-making is likely to come down to the Senate, where Republicans need at least nine of Schumer’s Democrats to support a funding bill.

That doesn’t mean progressives are going to be quiet about it.

Dozens of advocacy groups signed a letter Thursday urging top lawmakers in both chambers to reject any new funding for the wall and other Trump security priorities. Groups like the American Civil Liberties Union, Amnesty International and the SEIU have also begun a full-court press on Capitol Hill to oppose border money in any form.

“There is serious concern in terms of where Schumer is on negotiations,” Joanne Lin, the head of U.S. government affairs for Amnesty International, said in an interview.

“Border agents, just a few days ago, were lodging tear gas at families,” Lin said, calling it out of the question” to give more money to the Department of Homeland Security.

Burgess Everett and Heather Caygle contributed to this report.

White House

After two years of pugnacious foreign relations, the president is finding new ways to claim dealmaking prowess in an international arena.

President Donald Trump said his trade agreement with China was “one of the largest deals ever made.” He dubbed his new accord with Canada and Mexico the “most significant, modern and balanced trade agreement in history.” And he insisted that the world leaders he’s lambasted on the world stage had become great friends.

As he crisscrossed Buenos Aires, posing for photos with dignitaries and boasting about his accomplishments, Trump left behind a trail of exaggerations meant to paper over the fractious first half of his term and rebrand himself as a globe-trotting statesman.

Story Continued Below

It’s the Art of the G-20, by Donald Trump. The 45th president is writing his own rulebook on how to claim credit and respect on an international stage where many leaders have looked down on him for years. But just as his famous 1987 book counseled, Trump’s global deal-making was as much about style as substance, with grandiose talk the most important ingredient of all.

The president arrived back in Washington on Sunday feeling triumphant, believing his latest international trip to be a resounding success. During his overnight flight on Air Force One, Trump seemed vindicated after dealing with a long buildup of pressure to the summit in Argentina.

“It’s an incredible deal,” he told reporters of his agreement with China to temporarily pause new tariffs. “It goes down, certainly — if it happens, it goes down as one of the largest deals ever made.”

White House aides had reason to be happy, too. The gaffe-prone president managed to avoid a diplomatic snafu and even canceled a Saturday news conference that could have sent the entire trip off the rails. He laid off Twitter for more than 24 hours until later Sunday afternoon, when he chimed in with good wishes for Hanukkah.

But behind the veneer is a more complicated reality. His deal with President Xi Jinping of China was effectively an agreement to continue trying to agree. The president’s critics argue that the new North American trade agreement is little more than NAFTA 1.1. And behind all the smiles, many world leaders still have a strong distaste for Trump.

Some hid their disdain better than others. Chancellor Angela Merkel, whom Trump once accused of “ruining Germany,” showed no signs of animosity during a Saturday bilateral meeting with the president in which he called her his “highly respected” friend in front of a crush of reporters and TV cameras.

But Prime Minister Justin Trudeau of Canada at times looked as though he’d been taken hostage during the Friday signing of the new U.S.-Mexico-Canada trade deal, blank-faced and looking straight ahead as Trump touted their supposedly close relationship. Just hours before the signing, it wasn’t even clear whether Trudeau — who pointedly called the president by his first name during the ceremony and ignored Trump’s favored name for the agreement, USMCA, in favor of calling it the “new NAFTA” — would show up to the event.

For Trump, close relationships — or the appearance of them — are everything, causing some foreign policy analysts to worry that world leaders are cultivating personal ties to the president in order to get what they want from him.

During his dinner with Xi, Trump pointed to his admiration for the Chinese president, explaining, “I think that is going to be a very primary reason why we’ll probably end up getting something that will be good for China and good for the United States.”

This year’s Group of 20 may be as close as Trump will ever get to being embraced by the international community. Early in his presidency, Trump openly groused about having to attend such summits. But White House aides say the president has grown more confident in recent months, having built relationships with foreign leaders and beefed up his knowledge of policy issues.

And while aides were braced for Trump to go off script — as he has at so many prior global gatherings — he was unusually disciplined. He spoke only briefly to Russian President Vladimir Putin, with whom he had canceled a planned meeting over new Russian aggression against Ukraine (to hear Trump tell it) or new developments in special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation (to hear the Kremlin tell it).

According to the White House, Trump also exchanged just a few words with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who has been widely condemned over the October killing of Jamal Khashoggi. In either case, a chummy photo op — like the infamous image of Putin and bin Salman yukking it up with one another — would have driven media coverage of Trump’s entire trip.

Instead, Trump soaked in the tacit acceptance of the world leaders who he knows have privately snickered about him. During a group photo at the start of the summit, Trump could be seen smiling and chatting with President Emmanuel Macron of France. It was a sharp contrast from his recent trip to Paris, which included a rebuke of nationalism from Macron and was overshadowed by the White House’s decision to scuttle a planned trip to an American cemetery because of bad weather.

Foreign officials have learned to remain calm, focus on areas of agreement and, most important, find ways to get on Trump’s good side.

There was perhaps no better example of the flattery factor than Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s praise of Republicans’ performance in the recent elections, despite the fact that the GOP lost the House.

“I’d like to congratulate you on your historic victory in the midterm election in the United States,” he said.

Trump administration aides had a lot riding on the Xi dinner, which took place in a marble and stone-lined dining room just off a manicured courtyard in the president’s luxe Buenos Aires hotel. One U.S. official acknowledged privately before the dinner that a total collapse of the negotiations with China would have cast a shadow over the whole trip.

In the run-up to the dinner, senior officials were seen scurrying around the president’s hotel, rushing to prep sessions. Matt Pottinger, Trump’s China policy expert and a fluent Mandarin speaker, blew by reporters shortly before the meeting.

U.S. officials had been quietly negotiating with their Chinese counterparts for weeks, hashing out the details of an agreement to hold off on escalating the trade war in exchange for a pledge to continue discussions between the two nations.

But even on Friday night, many White House aides didn’t know exactly how it would go, noting that both Trump and Xi were unpredictable. One White House official who spoke to POLITICO before the summit called Xi a “wild card,” adding that he was difficult to read and noting that it was often difficult to get a clear sense of what the Chinese were thinking during the pre-dinner negotiations. Though senior aides had prepped Trump ahead of the meeting, they worried he could freelance — which, ultimately, didn’t happen.

While the contours of the China deal are still vague, the White House noted that the dinner resulted in one other significant concession from Xi: a promise to designate fentanyl as a controlled substance, a move that subjects people in China selling the synthetic opioid to the United States to severe penalties. White House aides hope the change will save a significant number of lives in the United States.

Still, one thing seemed certain long before the dinner took place: Both sides would declare victory in almost any scenario, unless the dinner turned into a complete disaster.

And that’s exactly what Trump did, with the White House releasing a statement from Air Force One that called the meeting “highly successful.” Indeed, one person familiar with the meeting said it lasted at least an hour longer than scheduled, with the delegations breaking into applause and posing for photos with each other.

“This was an amazing and productive meeting with unlimited possibilities for both the United States and China,” Trump said.

Zhou Xin of the South China Morning Post contributed to this report.