Illegal aliens aren’t just ‘guests’ — they’re future voters



After visiting a nearby resort filled with opulent wokesters, I couldn’t help but notice the signs proclaiming, “Love, not hate, makes America great.” I suspect the signs were meant to remind us of Donald Trump’s supposed nastiness for deporting as many as 50,000 illegal immigrants — most with criminal records. According to the left, such a policy makes Trump a fascist — maybe even the latest incarnation of Hitler.

A "nicer" leader, we’re told, would allow these illegal immigrants — including convicted rapists and other lowlifes — to remain in the country, at least until they exhausted multiple judicial appeals or committed a few more crimes. Why stop there? Let them vote in local elections, receive public assistance, education, and health care. After all, they supposedly enrich our society — or so Democrats insist, as they work tirelessly to provide all these forms of taxpayer-funded hospitality.

When virtue signalers clutch their pearls over Trump’s treatment of ‘nice illegal rapists,’ I have to wonder if they’re playing dumb.

But why did Democratic presidents we’re supposed to venerate — Bill Clinton and Barack Obama — get a free pass for far harsher deportation records? Clinton expelled close to a million illegal aliens with minimal judicial involvement, even boasting about his deportations during his re-election campaign. Obama, the left’s beloved heartthrob, threw out over four million illegal immigrants, aided by Trump’s current border czar Tom Homan, all without major interference from Democratic-appointed judges.

Compared to Clinton and Obama, Trump’s deportation numbers look paltry, especially given the legal and media warfare waged against him.

Even as recently as 2006, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) — now screaming about Trump’s “cruelty” — eagerly pushed for building a border wall. Thirty years ago, few Democratic senators would have voted against it. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), back then, warned against flooding the country with unskilled foreign labor that would hurt America’s most vulnerable workers. Obama himself praised tougher immigration controls. In 2006, Democrats still held some loyalty to their working-class base. They understood that saturating American communities with third world lumpenproletariat — not to mention foreign gangs — would devastate the working class.

That was before Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), Pete Buttigieg, Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas), and Rachel Levine became the faces of the rebranded Democratic Party.

Since then, both national parties have swapped electoral bases. Republicans moved away from country-club elites and realigned with the white — and increasingly Hispanic — working class. Democrats abandoned their traditional blue-collar support to embrace progressive white women, the LGBTQ lobby, government bureaucrats, black militants, and now, the cause of illegal immigrants.

For Democrats, the strategy is simple: expand the non-working-class base. Biden’s administration opened the border to as many as 10 million illegal aliens, and anyone with a functioning brain can see why.

Yet, when virtue signalers clutch their pearls over Trump’s treatment of “nice illegal rapists,” I have to wonder if they’re playing dumb. Do they really not know why their party flooded the country with illegal aliens? Do they honestly think slogans about "love" explain why Democrats fight tooth and nail to keep even convicted criminals from deportation?

Every illegal immigrant represents a potential future Democratic voter. If Trump’s administration was allowed to make moral distinctions among the "undocumented," Democrats might lose too many future loyalists. Better, from their view, to defend even a wife-beating, MS-13-affiliated “Maryland man” than risk losing tomorrow’s votes.

Perhaps I’m being unfair. Maybe the Democratic cheering squad doesn’t know — or care — how radically its party reversed itself on immigration. Maybe leftists assume their Democratic heroes always held the same radical social views as Tim Walz and Hakeem Jeffries.

Most live in the present, parroting whatever slogans the media and party elites hand them. If journalists and historians hide the truth, these activists show little curiosity to uncover it.

Meanwhile, the media and judicial attacks on Trump’s supposedly “Nazi-like” immigration policies continue to erode public support. Trump now polls negatively even on immigration, the very issue that propelled him into the White House.

If this delusion holds, Democrats may succeed in securing nearly all of their future voters.

‘Nonpartisan’ Judge Tied To Liberal Activism Arrested For Allegedly Helping Migrant Evade ICE Arrest

'The Judge’s obstruction created increased danger'

Dem Rep Admits Party Did ‘Poor Job’ Securing Border

'We have depended upon their labor for decades'

Trump’s border blitz puts military muscle to work



President Donald Trump has moved faster than anyone expected to secure the U.S.-Mexico border. His latest action — deploying the U.S. military to the Roosevelt Reservation, a 60-foot-wide strip of federal land spanning the border in California, Arizona, and New Mexico — is a necessary step to defend American sovereignty.

A White House memorandum issued April 11 authorizes the military to take temporary control of the corridor, detain individuals attempting illegal entry, and support key security operations, including barrier construction and surveillance. With drug cartels, human traffickers, and other criminal threats exploiting the southern border, this deployment offers a direct, long-overdue response to a crisis the political class has allowed to fester for years.

The military brings what civilian authorities can’t: logistical power, surveillance, and manpower. We’ve seen it work before.

Established in 1907 by President Theodore Roosevelt to safeguard the border, the Roosevelt Reservation provides the ideal legal framework for President Trump’s latest deployment. By designating the strip as a “National Defense Area,” Trump has empowered the military to act decisively within a clearly defined legal perimeter.

This renewed focus on border security comes none too soon. Under President Biden, the situation along the reservation deteriorated. In 2022, frustrated by the White House’s inaction, Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey (R) ordered shipping containers stacked along the reservation to block illegal crossings. His successor, open-borders Democrat Katie Hobbs, wasted no time removing them.

The Trump memorandum directs the Departments of Defense, Interior, Agriculture, and Homeland Security to transfer jurisdiction of the Roosevelt Reservation to the Pentagon. This move allows U.S. troops to detain border trespassers until Border Patrol can process them.

This isn’t “militarizing” the homeland — it’s using federal authority to defend it. The chaos Biden unleashed now demands real action. Trump’s strategy puts American citizens, not politics, first.

The need for this action is clear. Even with reports of fewer illegal crossings, the southern border remains a pipeline for deadly drugs like fentanyl — which killed more than 70,000 Americans in 2023. Cartels continue to exploit weak enforcement, using remote corridors like the Roosevelt Reservation to move narcotics and human trafficking victims deeper into the country.

Critics rushed to label Trump’s deployment an overreach, but their objections don’t hold up. Some claim the move violates the Posse Comitatus Act, the 1878 law restricting military involvement in domestic law enforcement. One activist even called the strategy a “crazy” attempt to skirt the law by labeling illegal aliens as trespassers on military land.

That argument is nonsense. The Posse Comitatus Act allows exceptions during national emergencies, and Trump’s declaration of a border emergency provides that authority.

What’s more, the military’s role under the April 11 memorandum is narrow and lawful. It simply detains border trespassers on federal land until civilian authorities take over. This mirrors past deployments under both Republican and Democratic presidents. The Pentagon isn’t rounding up citizens or patrolling cities. It is securing a narrow federal corridor explicitly designated for border protection.

Some Democrats and activist groups claim that deploying the military escalates tensions unnecessarily, especially since illegal border crossings have declined since Trump took office. But that argument misses the point. Crossings dropped because of Trump’s tough policies — not because the threat disappeared.

Cartels are opportunistic and fast-moving. They seize on any lapse in enforcement. The Roosevelt Reservation’s rugged terrain and rumored smuggling tunnels make it a prime target. A military presence deters those operations before they escalate.

Waiting for the next crisis — like the 2022 surge that saw more than 2.5 million migrant encounters — isn’t strategy. It’s surrender.

Open-border activists argue that Border Patrol or local law enforcement should secure the border alone. But that ignores reality. Of the border’s 1,954 miles, more than 700 run through rugged, hard-to-patrol terrain. Civilian agencies are already overwhelmed.

The military brings what civilian authorities can’t: logistical power, surveillance technology, and manpower. This isn’t theoretical. We’ve seen it work before. In 2018, during Trump’s first term, Operation Faithful Patriot provided vital support for wall construction in high-traffic zones — reducing illegal crossings where they were most severe.

Extending this strategy to the Roosevelt Reservation isn’t radical. It’s obvious.

Trump’s order rests on a simple truth: A nation without borders is not a nation at all. The new memorandum isn’t just defensible. It’s essential. Anyone who doesn’t see the military’s role in this crisis is clinging to the same mindset that let things spiral out of control in the first place.

Chuck Schumer Dodges Question Of Whether He Supports New Border Security Funding

'Their overall budget is awful'

What does Trump see in Canada's pro-China prime minister?



President Donald Trump seems wonderfully comfortable with Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney. He calls the Liberal leader “Mark” and “prime minister of Canada.”

Remember when it was “governor of the 51st state” for Trudeau?

Carney’s Jackson Hole speech flatly demanded that central banks collaborate and replace the US dollar to rectify its 'domineering influence' on trade around the world.

Trump has actually predicted that Carney will win the upcoming Canadian federal election and that he will be quite pleased with this result.

But the president is headed for a grim disappointment, because Carney is unlikely to do anything about an issue that Trump is viscerally concerned about: the fentanyl crisis.

Border disorder

Way back in late November 2024, Trump began to complain about Canada’s lax border security and the flow of fentanyl into the U.S. across that border and threatened to slap a 25% tariff on all Canadian products if these matters weren’t rectified.

Then-Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's government responded with a laughable $1.3 billion border security plan that was spread over six years with most of the funding only being available in years four through six. Trudeau also appointed a fentanyl czar who had previously worked as security adviser to the prime minister.

Of course this was all a bit of window-dressing, since, as investigative journalist Sam Cooper has noted, shipments of fentanyl precursors continue to arrive at the port of Vancouver and the containers are ignored.

Trudeau part deux

If Trudeau has done nothing to stem the tide of fentanyl, why should we believe that Carney will do any differently, especially when he is even more beholden and more in awe of China than his predecessor?

Where Trudeau once infamously said that he admired the “basic dictatorship” of China because it could force its population to follow climate change policies “on a dime,” Carney is a constant acolyte of the People’s Republic and has been for years.

So why has Trump endorsed Carney as his choice to win the April 28 Canadian federal election? Does he really believe that Carney will either bolster border security or take the fentanyl crisis seriously? Does he not believe that Carney’s principal opponent, Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre, is not serious about rectifying border security and eradicating fentanyl abuse when he has made both part of his election policy package?

Just how beholden is Carney to China? The evidence continues to emerge during an election campaign that Carney has virtually walked through so far, ahead in virtually every poll after Trudeau took the Liberal Party to record lows before he announced his intention to resign on January 6.

Poilievre protests

Poilievre expressed outrage on March 26 that Carney had the gall to meet with Chinese central bank officials in October 2024 to negotiate a loan for the Carney-chaired Brookfield Assets Management.

Why the fuss? Carney was working as a special economic adviser to Trudeau at the time, and he was in Beijing to ostensibly represent Canadian interests, not personal or business ones. Carney left with a 1.96 billion yuan or $276 million (CDN) loan.

Poilievre called China “a hostile foreign regime that we have since learned executed four Canadians and took numerous Canadians hostage for a lengthy period of time” and wondered how Canadians could know if Carney was “not going to act against our interests in favor of his financial interests.”

The Conservative leader suggested it would be difficult for the new prime minister to “stand up to foreign interference when he is so financially compromised.” He described Carney as:

a weak, out-of-touch leader so terribly compromised and conflicted, whose interests go against our national interests. … Mark Carney will never be able to protect our national interests because he has massive financial conflicts of interest overseas. What we need now is not to give the Liberals a fourth term with a weak and compromised leader. What we need is a prime minister who will put Canada first for a change.

That was only the latest revelation of Carney’s double dealing.

Chinese democracy

Carney was the chairman of Brookfield when he announced that the company was moving its headquarters to New York City. That was just before he announced that he was running for the leadership of the Liberal Party.

Despite telling the Trudeau government to push net zero policies at the expense of Canada’s energy sector and to oppose the construction of pipelines, Carney operated Brookfield in an inverse fashion, investing billions in fossil fuels and pipelines not associated with Canada.

Carney has consistently promoted net zero policies while praising the environmental stewardship of China. As the United Nations special envoy for climate change and co-chair of the Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero, Carney actually suggested that the world should look to China for climate change policy inspiration — and not look at the preponderance of coal-fired plants in that country.

"China has made a huge contribution to the fight against climate change, not only in terms of its massive investment in clean technologies and exporting them to other countries, but also in actively developing the financial system needed for the green transition," he said.

Yuan to grow on

It might also interest Trump that Carney has also been an advocate of the Chinese yuan replacing the U.S. dollar as the global currency. At the Jackson Hole Economic Symposium in 2019, Carney advocated for both the Chinese currency and also a "new synthetic hegemonic currency," to be used to replace the U.S. dollar as the world’s reserve currency.

Carney’s Jackson Hole speech flatly demanded that central banks collaborate and replace the U.S. dollar to rectify its “domineering influence” on trade around the world.

In the same speech, Carney bemoaned the booming economy that America was experiencing under Trump. “Now that the United States’ economy is doing better than most, pushing the dollar higher, smaller countries are suffering more than they should. Trump’s tariffs on imports from China and elsewhere are adding to the dollar’s strength as well, making matters even worse.”

Carney went on to say:

And the most likely candidate for true reserve currency status, the Renminbi (RMB), has a long way to go before it is ready to assume the mantle. The initial building blocks are there. Already, China is the world’s leading trading nation, overtaking the US at the start of this decade. And the Renminbi is now more common than sterling in oil future benchmarks, despite having no share in the market prior to 2018.

So while Carney is campaigning in front of a podium that reads “Canada Strong” and is somehow satisfying a U.S. president who supports America First, it will be China Strong and China First under this globalist, environmental extremist central banker whose election this month would be toxic for both Canada and the United States.

Obama judge orders Trump admin to bring mistakenly deported MS-13 member back to US



The Trump administration deported an illegal alien on March 15 who was found by more than one immigration court to be a "danger to the community" and a member of the terrorist organization Mara Salvatrucha.

While a prime candidate for removal, government attorneys indicated that Kilmar Abrego Garcia was ultimately deported to El Salvador "because of an administrative error."

An Obama judge ordered the Trump administration on Friday to bring the Salvadoran national back into the United States. On Sunday, U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis doubled down on her order, claiming that immigration agents "had no legal authority to arrest [Abrego Garcia], no justification to detain him, and no grounds to send him to El Salvador — let alone deliver him into one of the most dangerous prisons in the Western Hemisphere."

Xinis appeared particularly concerned that Abrego Garcia, whose lawyers claimed he is not a gangster, has been placed in a facility that "intentionally mixes rival gang members without any regard for protecting the detainees from 'harm at the hands of the gangs,'" stating that the "risk of harm shocks the conscience."

The Obama judge further suggested that Abrego Garcia's detention at the southern nation's Terrorism Confinement Center "appears wholly lawless"; that "equity and justice compels" Garcia's return to the United States; that the "legal basis for the mass removal of hundreds of individuals to El Salvador remains disturbingly unclear"; and that the government's "jurisdictional arguments fail as a matter of law."

Attorneys for the government previously indicated both that U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis lacks the jurisdiction to make such an order and that the Trump administration cannot bring the gang member back as he is no longer in American custody.

On the matter of jurisdiction, the Obama judge asserted that the "United States exerts control over each of the nearly 200 migrants sent to CECOT," noting "the Defendants detained them, transported them by plane, and paid for their placement in the mega-jail until 'the United States' decides 'their long-term disposition.'"

Xinis claimed further that she "retains jurisdiction because Abrego Garcia challenges his removal to El Salvador, not the fact of his confinement."

'We suggest the Judge contact President Bukele.'

Simon Sandoval-Moshenberg, the lawyer for Abrego Garcia, told Xinis that he wants to see the Trump administration "put on a leash" to make sure his Salvadoran client is returned in a timely manner, reported CNN.

The Obama judge, apparently keen to oblige Sandoval-Moshenberg, has ordered the government to "facilitate and effectuate the return" of the MS-13 gangster by no later than 11:59 p.m. on Monday.

Stephen Miller, White House deputy chief of staff, said in response to Xinis' order, "Marxist judge now thinks she's president of El Salvador."

Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin underscored in an interview last week that Abrego Garcia "is actually a member of MS-13 who was involved in human trafficking. It's unbelievable the framing of this. Whether this man is in El Salvador or in a U.S. detention center, he should be locked up."

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement, "We suggest the Judge contact President Bukele because we are unaware of the judge having jurisdiction or authority over the country of El Salvador."

While the Trump administration has found itself dealing with multiple activist judges like Xinis, in this case it has also suffered from players taking shots on their own net.

Erez Reuveni, the acting deputy director of the Department of Justice's immigration litigation division, was placed on administrative leave Saturday for bungling the case and failing to "follow a directive from [his] superiors," according to a letter sent to the lawyer and obtained by the New York Times.

Reuveni, 15-year veteran of the division, furnished Xinis with commentary that she made good use of in her Sunday ruling. He said that Abrego Garcia's deportation should never have taken place and expressed frustration with having the case land on his desk.

"At my direction, every Department of Justice attorney is required to zealously advocate on behalf of the United States," Attorney General Pam Bondi told the Times in a statement over the weekend. "Any attorney who fails to abide by this direction will face consequences."

It's unclear whether Reuveni's replacement will do a better job fighting to keep foreign gang members out of the homeland.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

JD Vance Fires Back At Hecklers Shouting At Him For Wanting To Secure Border

'Continue to flood the country with illegal immigrants'

Red States Snap Into Gear To Help Trump Enforce Immigration Laws

'Having employers that are knowingly coming in and bringing in illegal aliens who they know should not be in our country ... there needs to be stiff penalties.'

Trump Proves One Of Democrats’ Go-To Narratives Was A Complete Lie

It was all a lie...