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.”

https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/crime/item/25494-another-way-...

Views: 479

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Ronald,

I think Trump took the wall example that Israel has put up to stop the bombing in their country. 

That wall is secured by constant eyes on surveillance... and it is no where near as extensive... it requires positive hands on controls. 

The Israeli wall is only 96 miles long... big difference.  It was also constructed as a barrier to light armor and infantry... designed with different objectives.  It is not just a human barrier it is a military grade vehicle and light armor barrier.

Extremely expensive to build and over kill for what we need...  We are not at war with Mexico... not yet, anyway.

Hope you mean illegal Islamics

It wouldn't surprise me if it's going into the pockets of a lot of politicians...

MEXICO PAYING FOR THE WALL?  Let me count the many, many ways.  It will be built and Mexico will PAY!

That ocean of 'money' shown at the top of the story is IN MEXICO!  It's the proceeds from ILLEGAL DRUG transactions.  They could BEGIN with that cash hoard.  And every time we or they find a similar hoard it should go toward the construction of the wall.  

They could also immediately institute Drug Testing for any and all Welfare, once you test Positive, you're out. I do not care to have my Taxes paying for Dopers.  Develop a Team that does nothing, but track down Offenders, and prosecute them. 

This is a great idea.    Interdit and confiscate all this mony for the wall and for the trillion dollar price

tag on four infersructr rebuild.    After all its money obtained by illegal means and is fair game.   Mexico

wont have to pay after all

I just started a petition on the White House petitions site, We the People. Will you sign it? https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/ally-mexico-and-kill-or-c...

Andrew, I did sign and hope we get the numbers needed. Thanks

It is well known that they send money home to Mexico.  Add a huge tax on this and you will fund the wall.  Or use drug raid money.

RSS

LIGHTER SIDE

 

Political Cartoons by Tom StiglichPolitical Cartoons by AF Branco

Political Cartoons by AF Branco

ALERT ALERT

Joe Biden On Violence Against Women:   We Have To Keep ‘Punching At It, And Punching At It, And Punching At It’

 The audience laughed as he said this.

Former Vice President Joe Biden said that America needs to be “punching” back to combat violence against women during Wednesday’s Democratic debate.

Biden was asked if he would tackle specific issues regarding the #MeToo movement at the beginning of his presidency, if he were to be elected. The former vice president previously sponsored the 1994 Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), which aimed to protect victims of domestic violence.

The presidential candidate responded to the question about assaulting women by using the phrase “punching” repeatedly, apparently not thinking about the implications of using such a word.

“No man has a right to raise a hand to a woman in anger other than in self-defense, and that rarely ever occurs,” Biden said. “So we have to just change the culture, period, and keep punching at it and punching at it and punching at it. No, I really mean it.”

A few people laughed in the audience as he said this.

Biden added that it is important to pass the Violence Against Women Act, which has passed in the House and held up in the Senate. The former Vice President also suggested that America has to “fundamentally change the culture” of how women are treated, noting that it is “everyone’s responsibility.”

“It’s a gigantic issue, and we have to make it clear from the top, from the president on down that we will not tolerate it,” Biden said. “We will not tolerate this culture.”

Tucker's big takeaways from the Trump impeachment saga

© 2019   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service