Another Way to Fund Trump’s Wall: Interdict Drug Cartels’ Cash Flowing Into Mexico

Image result for cuarto lleno de dinero

With the announcement by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) on Tuesday that sites have already been selected to start building the wall across the country’s southern border came increased concerns about how it was going to be paid for. Said the DHS:

CBP [U.S. Customs and Border Protection] is taking immediate action in response to the president’s executive order. We have identified locations near El Paso, Texas, Tucson, Arizona, and El Centro, California, where we will build a wall in areas where the fence or old brittle landing-mat fencing are no longer effective.

The Border Patrol is also in the midst of an operational assessment, which will identify priority areas where CBP can build a wall or similar physical barrier on the border where it currently does not exist….

CBP has identified funding [sufficient] to begin immediate construction and is working with the Administration in these efforts.

The executive order “Border Security and Immigration Enforcement Improvements,” dated January 25, was equally vague about where the money would come from. The secretary of the DHS, John Kelly, was ordered to “identify and … allocate all sources of Federal funds” for the wall’s construction. Following the DHS announcement on Tuesday, White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer made passing reference to the question: “Right now, ICE and DHS in particular, as well as DBP, are looking at what this is going to cost.” That will be followed by “then figuring out how much can be handled through reallocation of resources and how much we can save maybe in other areas, but also work with Congress.”

Translation: The U.S. taxpayer will be paying for the wall, not Mexico, at least in the beginning, still leaving open the question of just where the balance of the estimated $20 billion construction costs will come from, exactly.

Some appears to be coming out of the DHS budget, currently at $41 billion. Some could be borrowed if Congress is amenable. Some could come from the budgets of the states most directly impacted by illegal immigration: Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and California. Some could come from some sort of as-yet-undefined “border tax” on imports from Mexico. Some could come from cutting U.S. foreign aid to Mexico. Some could come from funds illegals already in the states are sending back to their families in Mexico.

But according to John Cassara, all of this is way too complicated. Just ramp up efforts to enforce another executive order signed by the president on February 9, “Enforcing Federal Law with Respect to Transnational Criminal Organizations and Preventing International Trafficking”:

It shall be the policy of the executive branch to … strengthen enforcement of Federal Law in order to thwart … illicit activities … for example: the illegal concealment or transfer of proceeds derived from such illicit activities.

Cassara knows what he is talking about. Retired after 26 years in federal law enforcement, he is one of very few to have been both a clandestine operations officer in the U.S. intelligence community and a special agent for the Department of the Treasury. Wrote Cassara in the Washington Times:

Half a decade ago, a 2010 White House study pegged the rough number [for the drug trade] at $109 billion annually. Today, that number is doubtless higher.

Because of the crackdown and money laundering laws, cartels are moving between $18 billion and $39 billion of the proceeds of that drug trade in the form of bulk paper money. Wrote Cassara, “The process has gone industrial — which is exactly why it is the right avenue for recouping the money needed to build the wall.”

Just interdicting 10 percent of the lower estimate would, according to Cassara, generate $2 billion: “In ten years, [even] without increased efficiency, we would have the $20 billion needed to fund the wall — and likely take a bite out of drug trafficking, drug trafficker wealth, and domestic addiction in the process. That is what casual observers would call a win-win-win.”

Views: 483

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Collect 15% on all cash sent to mexico via EFT  if the person does not have a W2 or 1099 showing the cash was reported to the IRS.  That would net close to $3 Billion a year.   It is actually illegal for Western Union and Money Gram to sent this money to Mexico or anywhere outside the US without proof of its origin

It sure looks like DHS, Border Patrol and other Federal LE are seriously coming up with solutions to who will pay for the wall and yes the wall will be built. Good article, we need to see something is happening.

God Bless America and the State of Israel

Live Free or Die

Great Idea take the money and build that wall

         YES !!

Where will we get the money?

FBI agent confessed to stealing $136,000; Jesse Jackson Jr. illegally spent $750,000; Texas spends $45 mil. to educate illegals; $6 trillion missing from defense budget; $9 trillion missing from federal reserve; $6.6 trillion missing from FBI; Pentagon $6.5 trillion missing; Rumsfeld reports $2.3 trillion missing; Department of defense missing $6.5 trillion; 3 years ago $8.5 trillion Pentagon reported missing; 9/11 another $6.5 trillion missing;  State Dept. $6 billion;  AND THE LIST GOES ON... 


yeah they need to tell the can't find the money to someone more ignorant than the american taxpayers . They are thieves 


How about a rebate from the First Welfare family for dinners and vacations we paid for!

Where is all the seized money from drug trafficking? Billions of Dollars... where is it?  Why haven't they considered a border crossing fee... A toll to enter the US paid by anyone entering the US... a transaction fee not a tax.  I believe that the President probably already has the authority to establish or increase such a fee.  Let those who use the border pay for its security measures... tell land owners they can either donate access rights to maintain a fence or be the only place along the border without a fence or protection... real estate should not be a problem when the people holding it are properly advised and approached regarding gaining access to their lands for a security fence.

There are other ways to recoup the funds... stop worrying about funding and start building.  I would hope that the plans for the fence are integrated and coordinated ... 20 Billion seems like a lot of money for a fence and I question why?   Surly, there are in expensive ways to create a barrier that will work... and too aquire lease or permission... not to purchase but to use lands on the border... from individuals.

Look... no one on the border should expect to become rich over lands that are otherwise useless desert ... and those lands, not desert or in metropolitan areas, can be leased or access donated... not purchased. 

By the way it is to the benefit of the land owners on the border to have a barrier that keeps out drug lords and criminals... Maybe we should build the fence and let the hold outs (those not donating access and maintenance rights)  watch as they are left with the only opening in the fence along the border.  That ought to cause them to change their minds regarding providing free access to the lands needed for building and maintaining a security fence, on their land... If they won't provide access for free, then condemn the land, and pay its reasonable value... dessert land, without water?  Sen. Reid must be involved in the real estate side of building the fence... greedy bum.

You know half of them are getting a cut of the money.  Obama and holder on the top of the list of them  Pelosi  all the california people down south that have no objections to whats happening here.  they can't believe we aren't wise to it

"Surly, there are in expensive ways to create a barrier that will work..."

You underestimate the tenacity of the people we are trying to keep OUT.  A mere fence will not even slow them down!  A well monitored WALL will slow them down a lot.  It won't STOP them, but it will slow them.  Once we have a handle on them, we can work on getting rid of the Islamics.  

 Look I have seen the so called Iron curtain...over 4000K of barriers... not a fence.  It was very inexpensive and took less than a year to erect...

It was mainly constructed of a double barrier in rural areas... the barrier was made of barbed wire/razor wirer, with a chain link fence ... each barrier was separated by 100M of cleared land, seeded with anti-personnel mines... It was patrolled by dogs and had watch towers and garrisons posted in high density areas, places where crossings were likely. In metro areas it used a concrete block wall... topped by raxor wire and broken glass.  It also used air and sensors too monitor tunneling and attempts to approach and cross the barrier.

America's fence should be made of inexpensive easily maintained materials... say a double fence made of concertina and chain link fencing... with a 10-20 meter cleared zone between the two... with non-lethal land mines... between the barriers... That will stop any one from crossing.

Ground sensors to monitor for tunneling and anyone stupid enough to attempt crossing should be placed along the barrier on the US Side.  I would bet it would cost less than 10 Billion and take less than 18 months to construct.

Trump needs to solicit ideas on the barrier... going to contractors directly will end up getting grandiose ideas for constructing a Taj Mahal of a wall.  We don't need that... we need an inexpensive, easy to maintain effective barrier.  A double fence... with 10-20 meters of cleared land between them... containing non-lethal personnel landmines... meant to cripple but not to kill.  Enough to seriously discourage any attempt to cross. Clearly mark the land mines with written and picto-graphic warnings.

The double barrier...  should be constructed with a 12 feet chain link fence, surrounded by a triple strand concertina wall... anchored in concrete and buried 3'... The Concertina should extend to 3' above the chain link fence. A 20-30 meter cleared area between the double barrier.   Construct a 12' wide access road on both sides of the double barriers.  total width of barrier approximately 90 meters.

Use air and land patrols, seismic and movement sensors where heavy traffic is expected.  Use ground penetrating radar monthly to scan for tunnels.  Monitor fence for attempts to breech and repair as needed.   




Political Cartoons by AF Branco

Political Cartoons by AF Branco


Horrible: Democrats Set The Constitution On Fire With Fraudulent Impeachment

House Democrats unveiled two articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump on Tuesday morning after an investigation that violated fundamental provisions of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

The investigation of the president began with the complaint of a so-called “whistleblower” who turned out to be a rogue Central Intelligence Agency employee, protected by a lawyer who had called for a “coup” against Trump in early 2017.

Democrats first demanded that the “whistleblower” be allowed to testify. But after House Intelligence Committee chair Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) was found to have lied about his committee’s contact with the “whistleblower,” and after details of the “whistleblower’s” bias began to leak, Democrats reversed course. In violation of the President Trump’s Sixth Amendment right to confront his accuser, Democrats refused to allow the “whistleblower” to testify. They argue the president’s procedural rights, even if they existed, would not apply until he was tried in the Senate — but they also invented a fraudulent “right to anonymity” that, they hope, might conceal the whistleblower even then.

Schiff began the “impeachment inquiry” in secret, behind the closed doors of the Sensitive Compartmentalized Information Facility (SCIF) in the basement of the U.S. Capitol, even though none of the testimony was deemed classified. Few members of Congress were allowed access. Schiff allowed selective bits of testimony to leak to friendly media, while withholding transcripts of testimony.

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), having allowed the secret process to unfold, legitimized it with a party-line vote authorizing the inquiry. The House resolution denied President Trump the procedural rights enjoyed by Presidents Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton, and denied the minority party the traditional right to object to witnesses called by the majority.

Rather than the House Judiciary Committee, which traditionally handles impeachment, Pelosi also deputized the House Intelligence Committee to conduct fact-finding; the Judiciary Committee was turned into a rubber stamp. Schiff held a few public hearings, but often failed to release transcripts containing exculpatory evidence until after they had passed.

In the course of the Intelligence Committee’s investigation, Schiff quietly spied on the telephone records of his Republican counterpart, Ranking Member Devin Nunes (R-CA). He also snooped on the phone records of a journalist, John Solomon; and on the phone records of former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani, acting as President Trump’s personal lawyer.

Schiff’s eavesdropping violated both the First Amendment right to press freedom and the Sixth Amendment right to counsel. Yet he proceeded undeterred by constitutional rights, publishing the phone logs in his committee’s report without warning, confirmation, or explanation, alleging that Nunes and the others were part of a conspiracy to assist the president’s allegedly impeachable conduct. When Republicans on the Judiciary Committee asked the Intelligence Committee’s majority counsel, Daniel Goldman, to explain the phone logs, he refused to answer,

Ironically, Schiff had done exactly what Democrats accuse Trump of doing: abused his power to dig up dirt on political opponents, then obstructed a congressional investigation into his party’s and his committee’s misconduct.

Democrats’ articles of impeachment include one for the dubious charge of “abuse of power,” which is not mentioned in the Constitution; and one for “obstruction of Congress,” which in this case is an abuse of power in itself.

Alexander Hamilton, writing about impeachment in Federalist 65, warned that “there will always be the greatest danger that the decision will be regulated more by the comparative strength of parties, than by the real demonstrations of innocence or guilt.” Democrats have fulfilled Hamilton’s worst fears.

The Trump impeachment will soon replace the 1868 impeachment of President Andrew Johnson — which the House Judiciary Committee staff actually cited as a positive precedent — as the worst in American history.

In service of their “coup,” Democrats have trampled the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The Republic has never been in greater danger.

You don't get to interrupt me

© 2019   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service