President Donald Trump is eyeing a path to avoid another government shutdown where he would reluctantly accept the congressional border-security deal and attempt to tap other funds for his wall. Trump is likely to grudgingly sign the legislation and then immediately use his executive authority to fund additional border measures, said a person who talked to the president Tuesday and asked not to be identified to discuss private conversations. \u201cWe want to see the final piece of legislation and we\u2019ll make a determination,\u201d White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders told reporters Wednesday. \u201cWe actually like to read legislation before we agree with it.\u201d Continuing partisan fighting over legislation text as it is being written may delay its release and put off voting until Thursday but those hangups aren\u2019t expected to stop the deal from going through, according to another person familiar with the congressional negotiations. Lawmakers hope to release text of the bill late Wednesday night, according to a GOP aide. Late Tuesday, Trump tweeted that he was getting details of the plan from the lead Republican negotiator, Senator Richard Shelby of Alabama, and suggested he would pair money from the deal with money he would find elsewhere in the federal budget. \u201cWas just presented the concept and parameters of the Border Security Deal by hard working Senator Richard Shelby. Looking over all aspects knowing that this will be hooked up with lots of money from other sources..\u201d Trump wrote. The president\u2019s campaign for a wall on the U.S.-Mexico border is entering a new phase after his quest to get $5.7 billion in the agreement to keep the government operating fell far short. A tentative accord reached Monday night provides just $1.375 billion for 55 new miles of fencing in Texas. It\u2019s not clear how Trump arrived at the $23 billion figure. Debating Details Republicans want to put an extension to the Violence Against Women Act in the spending bill while Democrats are seeking a full reauthorization bill, according to a Democratic aide familiar with the talks. Border fencing provisions are still also being debated. Lawmakers left it up to staff to resolve a Democratic push to exclude the National Butterfly Center, a SpaceX launch pad and other areas in Texas from fence construction. The legislation would have to pass both chambers of Congress and get the president\u2019s signature before midnight Friday to keep the government open. Congressional Republicans have been pointing Trump to pots of federal money he could tap for his border wall to steer him away from using a politically and legally fraught emergency declaration. One Senate GOP leader, Roy Blunt of Missouri, said he\u2019s already scouring the federal budget for ways Trump could use available funds for a wall that won\u2019t trigger a power struggle with Congress. So far, he says, he\u2019s found at least one solid prospect: a program to combat drug trafficking that has $800 million left in its account. \u201cThere are a handful of those places, and if we get to the place where it\u2019s time to talk to the president about those I intend to,\u201d Blunt said. Funding Sources Other sources of money that have been discussed in varying degrees of seriousness include military construction funds, Army Corps of Engineers projects and money forfeited by convicted criminals. Any attempt to shift money is likely to trigger a new round of battles. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York and other Democrats insist that Trump would be barred from making transfers without congressional approval under restrictions in the new deal, and the matter could wind up in court. \u201cI think that\u2019s the place where it\u2019s likely to go, but I can\u2019t tell you that that\u2019s the course that we\u2019ll follow,\u201d said Senator Dick Durbin of Illinois, the No. 2 Democratic leader. Emergency Declaration Republican leaders have been delicately trying to forestall any effort by the president to declare a national emergency to get what he wants, despite weeks of threats. They say they have even warned him that enough Republicans could defect to override any veto of an expected resolution against his action if he does so. But Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky told reporters Tuesday that he wouldn\u2019t be opposed to the president taking lesser action to transfer funds, so long as they pass legal muster. \u201cI think he ought to feel free to use whatever tools he can legally use to enhance his efforts to secure the border,\u201d McConnell told reporters. \u201cSo no, I would not be troubled by that.\u201d White House Acting Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney already has made clear he\u2019s looking into options to further aid Trump\u2019s quest for a wall. Under current practice, the chairmen and ranking minority members of each spending panel subcommittee sign off on any reprogramming request. Gordon Gray, a former Senate Republican budget aide who is a fiscal policy specialist the advocacy group American Action Forum, said the administration is trying to avoid a legal challenge by scouring previous appropriations bills for extra money rather than boldly asserting it has presidential authority to defy Congress. \u2018Wiggle Room\u2019 \u201cIn the ordinary course of government appropriations, the legislative and executive branch build in wiggle room,\u201d he said. \u201cIt appears that by looking under the seat cushions they are trying to abide by the letter of the law.\u201d He said that military construction and Army Corps of Engineers funding has been talked about because Congress has already built in some discretion for the executive in those accounts. What is novel with Trump is that he is seeking to use a wide variety of disparate accounts for one wall project. \u201cThat\u2019s what makes it seem like a big middle finger to the legislative branch.\u201d Sam Berger, a specialist on appropriations and administrative law at the Democratic-leaning Center for American Progress, said Congress would have standing to sue the president for tapping those funds for a wall that has nothing to do with protecting the military or disaster mitigation. Congressional Intent \u201cOtherwise Trump could simply turn the military into his personal construction company and declare that improving his golf courses was a national emergency. This is not the intent that Congress had for those funds,\u2019\u2019 he said. The more likely course, Berger said, is using the drug trafficking corridor funds to put up barriers in areas with high levels of drug trafficking. Already some Republicans are telling Trump to be careful just which programs he taps. Armed Services Committee Chairman Jim Inhofe of Oklahoma said he had warned Trump not to touch military construction funds for the wall, but he could live with using Army Corps funds. Maine Republican Susan Collins went further, saying that redirecting billions of dollars without approval of Congress \u201cwould undermine the appropriations process and be of dubious constitutionality.\u201d Others are very much on Trump\u2019s side if he tries to re-steer funds to his coveted wall project, a top campaign promise from his 2016 campaign. Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, a top Trump ally, said he won\u2019t back this week\u2019s bipartisan agreement on border security unless Trump has some budgetary leeway to get more of what he wants. Graham said he wants assurances that Trump can utilize a steel barrier that he has advocated in recent months rather than a concrete structure. Gray said it is unclear if Congress would challenge Trump, whether it would have legal standing and whether it could prevail. The legislative branch may decide in the future to end some of the reprogramming discretion it has given the executive, however, if lawmakers feel the discretion has been abused. He said it is more likely that if Trump seizes private land for his wall without congressional authorization he would face legal challenges. \u201cI don\u2019t know that there is any time you tell a Texas rancher that some of their property is no longer theirs that they would simply accept that,\u201d he said.