nochules
1yr ago
I think one of the key things here is that the spending bill allocates money not just generically to "border protection" but rather to fund specific things, and some Republicans oppose the things that were being funded. For example:
Congressman Troy Nehls (R-TX-22) homed in on a portion of the bill that prohibits the use of funds set aside for U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) “to acquire, maintain, or extend border security technology and capabilities, except for technology and capabilities to improve Border Patrol processing.”
I suspect Nehls and Raskin differ greatly on what their definition of "border protection" means, which will make finding something they can both agree to very difficult.
nochules
1yr ago
The definition of “used” is that the FairTax has already been paid on it, or that it predates the existence of the FairTax. So not much of a loophole.
nochules
1yr ago
An important piece of context here is that she has made a seemingly false claim about a police interaction with her children before. She claimed that police officers pointed guns at her children while serving a search warrant on her house. That was not shown in the body camera video that was released by the police department, according to the Tampa Bay Times.
Remember "used" covers a broad definition of things. Somebody saying "I'm going to kick your ass" and the other guys saying "Unlikely because I have this gun" counts. I doubt that there would be a bunch of people lying about that, but if there were they would probably be canceled out by people lying in the other direction by not admitting they used the gun they were not allowed to legally have for self defense.
More options
Context Copy link