Isn’t that what we were told about Trump’s “deal” with Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer? We were told by the usual suspects that it was a “win” or that even if it wasn’t Trump was “forced” to work with two liberal Democrats because the dreaded “establishment” Republicans such as Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell weren’t down for the winning.

Our friend Kurt Schlichter over at Townhall tried in vain to put a good spin on all of it, ultimately reaching the conclusion Trump had no choice because capitulation is only possible with the establishment. Or something. He even asked this question:

It is the perfect illustration of the logical fallacy, in this case, avoiding the issue. His attempt to make Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell the focal point avoids the fact that Trump surrendered so fast, if he were Davey Crockett, the Alamo would have fallen just after the first shots were fired.

The issue is not the dreaded “GOPe.” The issue is Trump’s capitulation. The question is, “Did Trump do a good thing?” Kurt and others like him don’t want to answer that question, hence avoiding the issue somehow through osmosis, shifting blame to Ryan and McConnell.

After Trump got played, I had plenty of people chirping at me that Trump did this as part of a plan to get the Democrats to agree to some border wall funding in exchange for Trump signing DACA legislation (I suppose that’s another “win” for the anti-establishment crusaders). It was meant to be another one of his brilliant deal-making moves.

As it turns out, the Trump administration knows their new best friends, Chuck and Nancy won’t go for border wall funding at all. Of course, this serves as a reminder that Trump was full of crap when he said he’d get Mexico to pay for the wall. Plenty of us knew that was a garbage promise before Trump secured the nomination. Now the administration is hinting they don’t want that fight:

White House legislative affairs director Marc Short told reporters on Tuesday that President Trump would not demand that border wall funding is tied to a legislative replacement for the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program.

Speaking at a roundtable event hosted by the Christian Science Monitor, Short said the administration didn’t want to “bind” itself by making a demand that would likely be a nonstarter for many lawmakers.

“We’re interested in getting border security and the president has made the commitment to the American people that a barrier is important to that security,” Short said. “Whether or not that is part of a DACA equation, or … another legislative vehicle, I don’t want to bind us into a construct that would make the conclusion on DACA impossible.”

There had been speculation that Trump would require any compromise on potential DACA legislation include money for a wall along the southern border.

Short went on to say that Trump is still committed to building the wall. Of course, they’re going to say that. What else are they going to say?

The problem is, the Democrats are never going to agree to provide funding for a border wall and they’ll thwart any attempts to do so. Trump, in alienating the people responsible for getting the legislation to the floor of both chambers, made it worse for himself. Trump can seek out the Freedom Caucus all he wants. As much as I like Mark Meadows and Jim Jordan, they can’t move the football without it being handed them by Ryan.

Trump is proving to be the chump many of us said he would. People love that he “pisses off the libs” but he’s not getting anything done. True wins come from legislative victories. So far he’s got a donut hole to show for all of his bluster and supposed “alpha” maleness.

Tired of all the winning, yet?