No she didn't.

Time for the finger puppet view.

Most lawmakers argued the bill should cover just three issues: (1) protections for Dreamers; (2) beefed-up border security, including Trump’s campaign promise of a border wall between the United States and Mexico; and (3) efforts to reduce immigration based on family ties, sometimes known as chain migration.

This was the deal's framework. Left out of the article is the overarching context, of which most of you are unaware of: Ronald Reagan's famous amnesty for illegals, in which the democrats promised amnesty now, border security later. Reagan trusted them on amnesty, only to have them renege on their promise to do security later.

All the GOP lawmakers negotiating the bill were keenly aware of the nature of their opponents across the table and how far they trust their word on immigration, especially on a democrat anti-shibboleth like border security. They could trust them as far as they could say, throw a bus.

So there goes DiFi proposing the exact same deal that Reagan flubbed in the '80s. How do you think that was received?

Don't fall into the pattern of making accusatory statements about other posters; you're far better than that. The others on this thread suffer from gaps in their knowledge and lack the capacity to process complex topics but you are neither.