Building the Wall Will Require Presidential Extortion

Multiple news outlets are reporting President Trump agreed to exclude demands to build the southern border wall from a deal on DACA legislation. (Wash Examiner)

The White House hailed a “constructive working dinner” Wednesday night between President Trump and top Democratic congressional leaders, who claimed afterward they agreed to exclude the border wall from a deal on the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program. “We had a very productive meeting at the White House with the President,” Schumer and Pelosi said in a joint statement. “The discussion focused on DACA. We agreed to enshrine the protections of DACA into law quickly, and to work out a package of border security, excluding the wall, that’s acceptable to both sides.”

While this is the Democrat’s spin from dinner last night, the White House quickly denied it: (Wash Examiner)

“While DACA and border security were both discussed, excluding the wall was certainly not agreed to,” White House press secretary Sarah Sanders shot back shortly afterward.

Whether the President includes a border wall funding demand in the upcoming DACA vote is uncertain, but if he doesn’t,  you can depend on conservatives screaming to high heaven, and never-Trumpers crowing “I told you so…”.  Yet, perhaps they should be focused on GOP leadership and the Chamber of Commerce.

The MSM and Democrats would have you believe the GOP wants to build a border wall, and only they stand in opposition. This is not true and they know it, however; it is great for fundraising. The plain and simple fact of the matter is the current congressional GOP leadership is virulently against a border wall and will not support passage of border wall funding legislation.  (Wash Times)

Speaker Paul Ryan reportedly said during a private dinner earlier this year that nobody but nobody in Congress wanted a border wall — well, nobody except “one member,” Breitbart reported, citing a one-on-one with the former congressman, Tom Tancredo. “Ryan told a group of Republicans he met with … that only one person wants a wall,” Tancredo  said, “You have to understand the level of fear that exists in the Republican establishment about this issue.”

GOP opposition to border wall funding is predicated upon fear of the media, fear their big business donors, and fear of not being re-elected (Breitbart)

“The Chamber of Commerce doesn’t want a wall … the pressure is greater from the Chamber of Commerce than it is from the members,” Tancredo, who for years in the House fought a mostly fruitless battle to get Congress to combat the flood of illegal immigration, added. “That’s the basic problem. It was then. It is now.”

As the Washington Times reports, the GOP has obstructed any funding legislation (Wash Times)

Republicans, through action — or more to truth, inaction — and most recently, through Ryan, have shown an utter reluctance to get the process going. It’s not only their business backers they fear. It’s public relations and media coverage. There’s been a growing trend from the left to set fires, break glass and toss rocks at police and citizens alike whenever a conservative idea seems to gather steam on Capitol Hill. It’s not just the Chamber that lurks; it’s antifa and its thuggish cohorts. Combine that with a media heck-bent on taking down this White House, and the final result, in the minds of campaigning Republicans, is this: Bad press leading to reelection loss.

It doesn’t seem to make sense to double down on border wall funding when your own party stands in opposition. This fact isn’t hidden from the Democrats, all they have to do is sit back and wait for the President to cave, and then make political hay over it. When all along, GOP leadership knew it was a non-starter.

That being the case, there is only one way the President and his bonder control conservative supporters will ever see the southern border wall built. It will be messy, require considerable spine, and take around 90 days. But it will work, threatening corporate cash flow and profits always works.

The President should instruct Attorney General Sessions to issue a new directive, announcing ICE will shift its focus from the southern border temporarily, instead concentrating on interior control for the next 90 day.  The focus would be conducting a crackdown on corporations that hire illegal aliens.

He should announce ICE will start at the southern border from California to Texas and sweep north. No company would be excluded. General Sessions should be very explicit in explaining ICE will hit agriculture, poultry farms, construction firms, road-building companies, etc; with the intent of arresting and deporting illegal immigrants, slapping fines, penalties and obtaining as many indictments as possible.

The White House should braced itself for the howls of protest. Initially the Democrats and MSM will be the loudest, followed by liberal open-borders devotees. But once the enforcement takes effect, they can expect the Chamber of Commerce and GOP establishment leadership is be fiercely and defiantly opposed.

However, if the White House has the will to see it through, it wouldn’t be long before those companies begin to see profits fall as well as announcements of not hitting their quarterly projection. This will surely trigger Wall Street. Nothing like falling stock to motivate those guys.

It is a stone cold lock those CEOs would begin storming the gates of the White House in their limos in such numbers, it would take a team of valets to sort them out.

Mr Trump should then sit them down and explain the facts of life. Interior enforcement until the wall is funded, it is their responsibility to convince Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell, Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi. You can bet when Wall Street and big business money dries up, those four will cave so quick it would make your head spin.

The sad thing is interior border enforcement should be an given and be an on-going ICE effort. However in the case of funding of the southern border wall, it is just about the only chip on the table that has the power to bring all the players to the table.

It is a twofer win for Trump supporters, They get to see the wall built and watch Congress squirm. Win Win

Don’t miss out. Like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter.

Central American Migrants Increasingly Choosing To Settle In Mexico, Not The US

After hearing word that the new Trump administration is making it much more difficult to obtain asylum, migrants from Central America are making Mexico their final destination point.

Mexico – long a place where migrants from Central America made a waypoint between their homes and the United States – is now in the position of accepting thousands of refugee applications every year. People from the Northern Triangle (El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras) are hedging their bets on Mexico as the place to take them in now that the American government is cracking down on illegal immigration and making clear that asylum is not guaranteed.

Maureen Meyer, a senior associate at the Washington Office on Latin America, explained in a story from the Associated Press:

“If you look at Mexico’s definition of who can qualify for asylum, it’s much broader than the United States,” Meyer said. “If you are fleeing widespread violence in your country, you may be able to qualify for asylum in Mexico, whereas in the U.S. you have to prove that you belong to very specific groups of people.”

The numbers speak for themselves. Refugee applications in Mexico have risen substantially over the past couple of years. In 2015, it received 3,424 applications. In 2016, that number jumped to 8,794. We are barely halfway through 2017 and the number of refugee applications in Mexico already stands at 5,464 – well on track to surpass last year.

Experts say word of America’s tougher immigration policies is the main reason for the change in Central American migration patterns. People wishing to leave the Northern Triangle are acutely aware of what to expect in Mexico versus the United States. For example, the U.S. now denies around 80 percent of asylum claims by individuals from that part of the world. In comparison, Mexico granted asylum to about one of every three applicants from Central America in 2016.

They know which country will most likely let them stay.

Things didn’t always used to be this way. More than 100,000 unaccompanied minors entered the United States between October 2013 and July 2015. The Obama administration granted them (almost all exclusively from the Northern Triangle) expedited resettlement under an emergency order. As many as 2.7 million people from Central America were living in the United States in 2013.

The Trump White House, for their part, has made it clear to illegal immigrants that coming to this country is not worth the time and effort. Government officials have pressured Mexico to take in more immigrants while publicly discouraging others from attempting to reach the country illegally.

“We have asked them [Northern Triangle countries] to ask their citizens to not waste the money and head north, do not get on that terribly dangerous network,” John Kelly, the secretary of Homeland Security, reported to the Senate in June. “Stay where they are, because if they come here, this is no longer an illegal-alien-friendly environment.”


San Francisco Awarding $190,000 To Illegal Immigrant After Reporting Him To Authorities

San Francisco is shelling out almost $200,000 to an illegal immigrant after city employees violated its own sanctuary city law.

Pedro Figueroa-Zarceno, a 33-year-old undocumented immigrant from El Salvador, was the alleged victim of a car theft. Figueroa-Zarceno went to a local police station to report the crime in the hopes of getting his car back. Police officers at Southern Station ran him through the system and discovered that, not only was he living in the country illegally, but that he also had a warrant out for his arrest (though police were not able to find details on the warrant).

Police officers then did something absolutely crazy and inexcusable: they reported Figueroa-Zarceno to immigration authorities. Agents arrested him as he left the station.

Despite doing something completely reasonable, police officers actually violated their own city’s laws. San Francisco is a sanctuary city. Its ordinance, Due Process for All Ordinance, dictates that local police officers are prohibited from cooperating with ICE or any immigration officials – except in cases of violent crimes. Since Figueroa-Zarceno was not involved in a violent crime when he reported his stolen vehicle, police officers violated San Francisco law when they turned him over to Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

Because of this, the El Salvadorian citizen sued the city of San Francisco on January 17… and won big league. The City Attorney’s Office awarded him $190,000 this week.

“It’s really important for San Francisco to remain a sanctuary city not in name only but also in practice,” stated Saira Hussain, the lawyer who represented Figueroa-Zarceno. Many attorneys like her are working hard to make sure San Francisco abides by its sanctuary city law.

An illegal immigrant with an arrest warrant successfully sued a major American city because he was detained by immigration authorities… let that sink in for a moment.




Juan Manuel Montes, First “Dreamer” Deported, Has a Criminal Record

The first of the so called “Dreamers” to be deported is named Juan Manuel Montes. He was brought to the United States by his parents as a 9 year old child and is now in his twenties. He has received several deferments under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (“DACA”) program established by Barack Obama.

I am one of those squishy Republicans on this issue. I think if a child was brought here by his parents and, since coming here, he’s been a law abiding resident, we should let him stay. In the vast majority of cases, this is the only country the person will have a memory of. Montes, due to his age, has a memory of home, but was still a child. I don’t think the party of families should be breaking up families. That does not mean I favor citizenship, but I do favor legal resident alien status.

But I am okay with deporting Juan Manuel Montes. Much, though not all, of the media and almost every outraged activist is ignoring that he has a criminal record.

Likewise, Montes’ story differs in key details from what Customs and Border Protection claims. According to the government, Montes actually had gone into Mexico and climbed a fence to get back into the United States. Additionally, he admitted under oath he had done so. Additionally, his DACA status was expired.

Oh, and did I mention he had multiple arrests, including for shoplifting?

This is not a sympathetic case and I have no problem with his deportation. If he was dumb enough to leave the country and climb a fence to get back in, he might as well go elsewhere anyway. But that he was here as an illegal alien and continues to break the law makes him not a sympathetic figure.

JUST IN: Rep. Rogers (R-AL) Files Bill To Fund Border Wall By Taxing Illegal Immigrants

Representative Mike Rogers – a Republican representing Alabama’s Third District, has just filed a bill designed to jump start funding for Donald Trump’s proposed border wall.

HR 1813, also called the Border Wall Funding Act of 2017, would impose a 2% fee on all money being sent across the border by wire transfer to countries south of the United States. According to Representative Rogers’ press release, Mexico alone received over $24 Billion via this method in 2014, and other countries received over 15% of their total national GDP from these international money transfers from the United States.

“President Trump has made it very clear that he intends to complete a wall along our Southern border. As a senior member of the Homeland Security committee, I have long supported the border wall, which will protect Americans.”

“In order to jumpstart the funding of the wall, I have introduced a bill to impose a 2% fee on remittances sent south of the border. This bill is simple – anyone who sends their money to countries that benefit from our porous borders and illegal immigration should be responsible for providing some of the funds needed to complete the wall. This bill keeps money in the American economy, and most importantly, it creates a funding stream to build the wall,”

– Rep. Mike Rogers (R-AL03)

There are not currently any estimates as to exactly how much money this proposal would raise.

What do you think about this proposal? Do you support or oppose this bill? Let us know by sharing this article on Twitter with your thoughts and tagging @Resurgent.

Homeland Security Sees 40% Fewer Illegal Immigrants Crossing The US-Mexico Border

An interesting thing has happened at our southern border, and it’s worth watching to see if it turns into a trend: Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly announced this week that the U.S. Customs and Border Protection Agency has seen a 40% drop in illegal immigrants entering the country between January and February – a time when illegal immigration usually increases.

Kelly stated that the number of “inadmissible persons” at the southern border dropped to 18,762 persons in February from 31,578 in January. He added, “Since the administration’s implementation of executive orders to enforce immigration laws, apprehensions and inadmissible activity is trending toward the lowest monthly total in at least the last five years.”

Kelly said the U.S. Customs and Border Protection agency usually sees a 10 percent to 20 percent increase in apprehensions of illegal immigrants from January to February.

Kelly commented that the drop in illegal immigrants is a result of President Donald Trump’s immigration policies. The two executive orders Trump issued in late January called for the building of a wall to secure the border along with a clearer set of guidelines for deportations.

According to the BBC, the Mexican government has referred to the Trump-era immigration policy as “hostile” and “unacceptable.”

Will the decrease become a trend? How well will Trump’s immigration policies work? It’ll be worth watching to see if these numbers drop even more or bottom out.

Big City Defiance on Sanctuary Cities

Hear ye, hear ye!  Their honors, the mayors of Big Democrat metropolises, have taken a brave stand in defying the Trump administration’s new executive order cutting off federal funds to sanctuary cities:

As Trump announced the order — as well as action to build a wall along the U.S-Mexico border and hire thousands of new border patrol agents and immigration officers — leaders of some of the nation’s biggest cities flatly stated they would not be cooperating with the president.

And just who might these pillars of public service be?  Pretty much the usual suspects:

In Boston, Mayor Marty Walsh called the executive order an attack on “Boston’s people, Boston’s strength and Boston’s values.”

“If people want to live here, they’ll live here,” Walsh told reporters at a news conference. “They can use my office. They can use any office in this building.”

Yeah, Marty.  I’m sure you’ll let them take you up on that offer.  Perhaps we can set up a Go Fund Me to provide cab fare for those huddled masses who want to crash at the mayor’s pad?  I’ll be the first to chip in.

In Seattle, Mayor Ed Murray said that he had directed city departments to review their budgets to prepare for a potential loss of federal funding, the Associated Press reports.

“This city will not be bullied by this administration,” Murray said. “We believe we have the rule of law and the courts on our side.”

Um, Ed–seeing as you’re abetting a violation of federal immigration statutes, I’m pretty sure the law’s not on your side.

In Chicago. . .Mayor Rahm Emanuel vowed that the nation’s third largest city would remain a sanctuary city.

“I want to be clear. We’re gonna stay a sanctuary city,” Emanuel said. “There is no stranger among us. We welcome people, whether you’re from Poland or Pakistan, whether you’re from Ireland or India or Israel and whether you’re from Mexico or Moldova, where my grandfather came from, you are welcome in Chicago as you pursue the American Dream.”

Left unsaid was how Chicago’s wave of violent crime and murder has illegal immigrants so scared, they don’t want to go there anyway.  So at least Rahm knows he’s off the hook.

The best, however, is New York City’s own “Che” de Blasio, who proves–like the voters who elected him–if you’re gonna do something stupid, you may as well go big:

De Blasio said that the city has been able to dramatically reduce the crime rate in the nation’s largest city, in part, because relationships the police department has managed to build in immigrant communities. He added that if Trump follows through with the plan it would mean he’s effectively cutting funding from the New York Police Department. An early analysis by NYC officials suggested that about $156 million in federal funding for the NYPD could be impacted.

“Here in New York City and in cities across the nation, this executive order could in fact undermine public safety and make our neighborhoods less safe,” de Blasio said.

Got that, New Yorkers?  Your mayor says if crime skyrockets, that’s okay so long as Hizzoner’s conscience is clear.

I actually think that if the Trump administration plays this the right way, it could be a real opportunity.  De Blasio doesn’t exactly have a great relationship with the NYPD, and the Fraternal Order of Police already backed Trump in the election.  It wouldn’t be hard for Trump to drive an even bigger wedge between de Blasio and the cops, especially when they tell everyone that the mayor is more concerned about the well-being of illegal immigrants than he is about the safety of his own citizens.  My guess is that de Blasio would fold faster than a cheap suit, and the other mayors would follow.

Texas Governor Greg Abbott Digs In Against Sheriff Who Flouts Immigration Law

Governor Greg Abbott of Texas has gone on record that he wants jurisdictions in his state to comply with immigration laws, going so far as to say that he would withhold funds from localities who provide sanctuary for illegal immigrants or otherwise go against existing laws.

Travis County Sheriff Sally Hernandez has told her deputies not to cooperate with U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents, and Abbott has spoken out in the form of a letter to Hernandez.

Abbott sets up by telling Hernandez that she had betrayed her oath by adopting this policy.

As Sheriff your primary duty is to ensure the safety of the residents of Travis County. However, your recent policy directive forbidding Travis County Sherriff’s Office (TCSO) employees from cooperating with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) (except in the most limited of circumstances) betrays your oath and the residents of Travis County. I strongly urge you to reverse that policy before its effective date of February 1, 2017.

Hernandez had at one point attempted to justify her directive, but Abbott, is having none of it, smashes her reasoning.

You offer two justifications for your actions, but both are frivolous. First, you claim you have no legal power to comply with ICE detainers. That proves too much, of course, because by your own admission, TCSO will honor some ICE detainers — for example, when the alien is charged with or convicted of capital murder. You have the exact same legal authority to honor ICE detainers for capital murder cases as you do for other crimes that you personally deem unworthy of enforcement. Second, you claim that TCSO should focus on “public safety,” while the federal government focuses on immigration enforcement. That ignores, of course, that the individuals subject to ICE detainers pose grave threats to public safety. The whole point of ICE’s detainer program is to ensure that the worst of the worst do not walk free and further jeopardize public safety.

Abbott goes on to cite staggering statistics that prove how wrongheaded policies like that of Hernandez are:

These undocumented aliens were charged with more than 559,000 criminal offenses. According to Texas Department Public Safety, those included 1,132 homicide charges; 66,687 assault charges; 16,304 burglary charges; 66,289 drug charges; 682 kidnapping charges; 39,689 theft charges; 43,723 obstructing police charges; 3,677 robbery charges; 5,903 sexual assault charges; and 8,375 weapons charges. Of the total undocumented aliens arrested in that time frame, over 139,000, or 66 percent, were identified by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security as being in the United States illegally at the time of a previous arrest.

The governor concludes by giving Hernandez a date of February 1 to comply with existing immigration statues or he will withhold funding. It’s encouraging to see him standing firm on his promises to uphold the law.