Trump threatens Mexico with tariff, sanction for violating water treaty and 'hurting' American farmers



President Donald Trump threatened Mexico on Thursday with tariffs and sanctions if it continues "stealing" water from Texas.

Trump's comments referred to a 1944 water treaty for the "Utilization of Waters of the Colorado and Tijuana Rivers and of the Rio Grande," which requires Mexico to send 1.75 million acre-feet of water from the Rio Grande every five years. The U.S. is required to send Mexico 1.5 million acre-feet of water every year from the Colorado River.

'We will keep escalating consequences, including TARIFFS and, maybe even SANCTIONS, until Mexico honors the Treaty, and GIVES TEXAS THE WATER THEY ARE OWED!'

The New York Times, based on International Boundary and Water Commission data, stated that from October 2020 to October 2024, Mexico provided only roughly 400,000 acre-feet of water, falling substantially short of its treaty obligations.

Last month, Trump threatened to cut off water to Tijuana over Mexico's failure to keep up its end of the deal, which the Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs explained has been "decimating American agriculture — particularly farmers in the Rio Grande valley."

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) called Trump's action "excellent."

"This option is absolutely what the Trump administration needs to pressure Mexico to fulfill its obligations under the 1944 Water Treaty," he wrote in a post on social media. "Texas farmers are in crisis because of Mexico's noncompliance. I will work with the Trump administration to pressure Mexico into complying and to get water to Texas farmers."

On Thursday, Trump warned Mexico yet again, this time threatening to impose additional tariffs and "maybe even SANCTIONS."

"Mexico OWES Texas 1.3 million acre-feet of water under the 1944 Water Treaty, but Mexico is unfortunately violating their Treaty obligation. This is very unfair, and it is hurting South Texas Farmers very badly," Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social.

He said that Texas' only sugar mill was forced to close because Mexico has been "stealing the water" from farmers.

Trump credited Cruz for leading the effort to hold Mexico accountable and ensure that farmers are provided with the water they are "owed," noting that former President Joe Biden "refused to lift a finger."

"THAT ENDS NOW! I will make sure Mexico doesn't violate our Treaties, and doesn't hurt our Texas Farmers," Trump continued. "My Agriculture Secretary, Brooke Rollins, is standing up for Texas Farmers, and we will keep escalating consequences, including TARIFFS and, maybe even SANCTIONS, until Mexico honors the Treaty, and GIVES TEXAS THE WATER THEY ARE OWED!"

Rollins thanked the president for his commitment to help farmers.

"Texans know a thing or two about facing down Mexico — especially when Mexico breaks its promises and takes what's ours," Rollins stated. "With your leadership, we're going to get that water we're due — for Texas, and for America."

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

Why the Panama Canal matters more than ever to US security



The Panama Canal, far from being a relic of a bygone era, remains a critical asset that the United States cannot afford to ignore — especially when foreign adversaries like China are capitalizing on its strategic location.

For more than a century, the canal has been vital to U.S. national security and economic interests. But when President Donald Trump recently made waves by suggesting that the U.S. should consider repurchasing it, many were quick to dismiss him as a provocateur. His remarks were not baseless, however, and he hasn’t been the first U.S. president to assert sovereignty over the critical trade route.

Trump’s call to repurchase the canal was not a random or reckless suggestion — it was a recognition of the strategic importance of this vital asset.

In 1976, Ronald Reagan declared, “The Panama Canal Zone is sovereign U.S. territory.” Following in Reagan’s footsteps, Trump declared in a series of Truth Social posts that the canal is a “vital national asset” due to its pivotal role in U.S. trade and military logistics. Indeed, the canal handles around 40% of the world’s cargo, with approximately 72% of its traffic tied to U.S. ports. This means that the U.S. depends on the smooth operation of the canal for both its economy and its security.

Moreover, the canal plays a critical military role: It is the quickest route for U.S. naval ships to transfer between the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, saving thousands of miles that would otherwise require a dangerous and time-consuming detour around South America. In times of crisis, those extra 8,000 miles make all the difference.

History sets the stage

Panama exists as an independent nation because of U.S. intervention. In 1903, when Colombia refused to allow the U.S. to build the canal, the U.S. supported Panama’s independence, ensuring the new country would grant America control over the Canal Zone. The U.S. built the canal at a tremendous cost — both in dollars and in human lives — and the strategic importance of this waterway has never diminished.

However, in the 1960s and ’70s, rising anti-colonial sentiments led to growing resentment in Panama toward U.S. control. Amid these tensions, the U.S. transferred control of the canal to Panama under the 1977 Torrijos-Carter Treaty. Despite the good intentions of that agreement, the transfer of control has created a vacuum that other nations, most notably China, are eager to fill.

China’s expansion demands a US response

China’s growing influence in Panama is not just an economic concern — it’s a national security threat.

China has been aggressively expanding its footprint in Latin America, and Panama has been one of its primary targets. Chinese companies now manage key ports along the canal, and Beijing’s Belt and Road Initiative has solidified Panama’s role as a critical part of China’s global strategy. Moreover, China is building a fourth bridge over the canal and has used telecommunications infrastructure to establish a firm presence in the region.

The most worrying aspect of China’s involvement is its potential for military leverage. The Panama Canal is a chokepoint — a strategic vulnerability in global trade and military operations. If tensions between the U.S. and China were to escalate, Beijing could use its influence over Panama to disrupt U.S. access to the canal, with severe consequences for both U.S. trade and naval operations.

Trump’s call to repurchase the canal was not a random or reckless suggestion — it was a recognition of the strategic importance of this vital asset.

Under current circumstances, the canal’s control is increasingly falling under the sway of a nation that does not share U.S. interests. With Chinese tech companies like Huawei involved in the region and Chinese-built surveillance systems monitoring the canal, the risk of espionage or sabotage cannot be ignored.

A threat to national sovereignty?

While Panama’s president may assert that the canal “belongs to Panama,” the reality is that the canal’s significance extends far beyond Panamanian borders. It is a key asset in the global balance of power, and its strategic importance to U.S. national security cannot be overstated.

Trump was right to bring it back into the spotlight. If we are to maintain our status as a global superpower, we must ensure that our vital trade routes and military chokepoints remain under friendly control.

The Panama Canal is not a relic of American imperialism, as the media is attempting to portray — it is a linchpin in the U.S. economy and defense strategy. As China’s influence continues to grow in Latin America, we must re-evaluate our position on the canal. Trump’s stance may prove essential for safeguarding America’s future. The time to act is now, before the canal becomes yet another piece of infrastructure that is no longer in America’s sphere of influence.

Want more from Glenn Beck? Get Glenn's FREE email newsletter with his latest insights, top stories, show prep, and more delivered to your inbox.

Globalists suffer big upset in Geneva; WHO chief urges aggressive crackdown on 'global pandemic agreement' skeptics



WHO director-general Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus and other globalists were met with failure at the May 27-June 1 World Health Assembly in Geneva, Switzerland. Rather than win over critics with reassurances ahead of the next stage of his campaign to promote the failed scheme, Ghebreyesus instead doubled down, urging a crackdown on skeptics.

Road to failure

Ghebreyesus has spent several months promoting his "global pandemic agreement."

In his Feb. 12 Dubai address, entitled, "A Pact with the Future: Why the Pandemic Agreement Is Mission-Critical for Humanity," Ghebreyesus said, "We cannot allow this historic agreement, this milestone in global health, to be sabotaged by those who spread lies, either deliberately or unknowingly."

The critics whom Ghebreyesus branded liars and conspiracy theorists include those who reckon the pact would undermine national sovereignty as well as those skeptical of the WHO's competence. In the latter case, the WHO did itself no favors in recent years, particularly during the pandemic.

After all, the organization reportedly aided the Chinese communist regime in its cover up of COVID-19's origins; told the nations of the world not to restrict travelers from China or close their borders even though China had domestically; granted Beijing a veto over the WHO's COVID-19 origins report; and it endorsed vaccines that were not nearly as safe or as effective as advertised, including the blood clot-inducing Oxford-AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine whose developer now faces a class-action lawsuit over injuries in the United Kingdom as well as a recent lawsuit in Utah. Prior to the pandemic, it also courted controversy with its sexual abuse scandal, wasteful spending, and corruption.

Evidently, it was not enough for the WHO director to demean opponents of his grand scheme to see it through.

'I know that there remains among you a common will to get this done.'

"Of course, we all wish that we had been able to reach a consensus on the agreement in time for this health assembly, and cross the finish line," Ghebreyesus said in his opening remarks at the 77th World Health Assembly. "I remain confident that you still will, because where there is a will, there is a way. I know that there remains among you a common will to get this done."

In the days that followed, the assembly failed to cross the finish line or even come close. As the result, Ghebreyesus has sought to transform the race into a marathon.

New deadline for a desired result

Desperate to keep the dream alive after two years of futile negotiations, the WHO had countries agree to continue negotiating the proposed globalist pact. A package of half-measures have apparently been accepted to tide over pandemic treaty supporters in the meantime.

The WHOsaid in a statement Saturday that the World Health Assembly and its 194 member countries "agreed [on] a package of critical amendments to the International Health Regulations (2005) (IHR), and made concrete commitments to completing negotiations on a global pandemic agreement within a year, at the latest."

The half-measures compromise amendments to the IHR that will supposedly "strengthen global preparedness, surveillance and responses to public health emergencies, including pandemics."

These include a new definition for "pandemic emergency"; another "equity"-driven international wealth re-distribution mechanism; the creation of a new bureaucracy to oversee the implementation of the other half-measures; and the creation of IHR authorities for member countries to "improve coordination of implementation of the Regulations within and among countries."

"The amendments to the International Health Regulations will bolster countries' ability to detect and respond to future outbreaks and pandemics by strengthening their own national capacities, and coordination between fellow States, on disease surveillance, information sharing and response," said Ghebreyesus. "This is built on commitment to equity, an understanding that health threats do not recognize national borders, and that preparedness is a collective endeavor."

Clampdown on vaccine critics

After negotiators failed to produce a draft deal for approval by the WHO annual assembly, Ghebreyesus gave a speech promoting health initiatives and vaccines.

'I think they use COVID as an opportunity and, you know, all the havoc they're creating.'

Toward the end of his remarks, he noted, "You know, the serious challenge that's posed by anti-vaxxers and I think we need to strategize to really push back because vaccines work, vaccines affect adults, and we have science, evidence on our side."

"I think it's time to be more aggressive in pushing back on anti-vaxxers," continued the WHO director. "I think they use COVID as an opportunity and, you know, all the havoc they're creating. Maybe that's one of the messages I'd also like to include to whatever I have [to] say."

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

FACT CHECK: Did Joe Biden Sign Away The Sovereignty Of The United States?

Biden did not sign away the nation's sovereignty

Horowitz: 21 Senate Republicans vote to outsource our air conditioning to the UN



Evidently, many Republicans think we don’t have enough green fascist mandates, the U.N. doesn’t have enough power, and Americans don’t pay enough for an increasingly dwindling supply of appliances that work less effectively than they did 50 years ago. With little fanfare, 17 Republican senators joined every Democrat to advance a treaty that will make air conditioners more expensive.

Air conditioning is one of the greatest inventions of all time and contributes hugely to the amazing quality of life our grandparents developed for us. Naturally, it is on the hit list of the Great Reset transhumanists. One would think at a time of record high electricity costs, Republicans would zealously oppose any new green energy mandate, especially one that is in the form of an international treaty. But every time you think Republicans might finally discover a soul, you must think again.

On Wednesday, the following 17 Republicans joined with every Democrat in attendance to invoke cloture on the Kigali Amendment to the Montreal Protocol, a 1987 treaty designed to cut down on certain chemicals, such as chlorofluorocarbons, to supposedly save the ozone layer. On Thursday, 21 Republicans, including Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, joined in ratifying the treaty 69-27.

  • Blunt, Roy (Mo.)
  • Boozman (Ark.)
  • Burr (N.C.)
  • Capito (W.Va.)
  • Cassidy (La.)
  • Collins, S. (Maine)
  • Ernst (Iowa)
  • Graham (S.C.)
  • Grassley (Iowa)
  • Hyde-Smith (Miss.)
  • Kennedy (La.)
  • McConnell (Ky.)
  • Moran (Kan.)
  • Murkowski (Alaska)
  • Portman (Ohio)
  • Romney (Utah)
  • Rubio (Fla.)
  • Sasse (Neb.)
  • Tillis (N.C.)
  • Wicker (Miss.)
  • Young, T. (Ind.)

The protocol requires countries to progressively decrease their use of hydrofluorocarbons by 80% to 85% of a baseline in the treaty by 2036. Hydroflourocarbons are the reason you can enjoy living in your home or walking into any store or commercial establishment during the summer. They are the refrigerants in any air conditioning system. The EPA has been gradually cutting levels of HFCs, which is why anyone who has recently called the AC repairman for an infusion of coolant will receive a sticker shock on the bill, as I did earlier this summer.

Originally, before this provision was stripped out in an amendment, China would have been given an extra decade over the U.S. in continued use of HFCs. As Ben Leiberman, an energy policy analyst at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, notes, this treaty is essentially a handout to China:

This includes an HFC phasedown schedule that gives these countries an extra ten years. Thus, factories located in China will have access to cheap and plentiful HFCs long after supplies get tight for facilities located here. To make matters even worse, the U.S. is the single largest contributor to a UN fund that will assist China and other developing nations with compliance. So, we will be giving China an unfair advantage and sending them tax dollars as well.

The cruel irony is that HFCs were used in air conditioning to replace the original substances phased out under the original Montreal Protocol because they were deemed better for the ozone layer. But now they are claiming that HFCs are bad for global warming (which they artfully renamed “climate change”), so we need to move on to the next cronyist socially engineered product designed to enrich a few to the detriment of billions of people.

Ultimately, the disparity between the U.S. and China was taken out (not before 17 Republicans were still willing to support it), but it doesn’t matter, because China plays by its own rules. A 2019 study published in Nature showed how chemical plants in eastern China were still producing trichlorofluoromethane, in contravention of the original Montreal Protocol.

So why did so many Republicans support it, many others didn’t exactly fight against it, nor did leadership whip against it? Because like everything else, it boils down to the giant corporations. The existing monopolies in the air conditioning business, such as Honeywell, stand to benefit from high prices. They have patented the new coolants to replace HFCs and have lobbied hard for this bill. Even when Republicans don’t ideologically support the left’s agenda, the transnational quasi-government-controlled and China-influenced corporations will land them in the same territory as the left. This is why McConnell and gang supported the $280 billion “CHIPS” bill to hand IBM and China a monopoly on semiconductors and fund our corrupt science agencies with record infusions of cash.

It is also why the Washington Post crowed, “It’s rare for a climate change measure to win full-throated support from industry groups, environmental activists and lawmakers from both sides of the aisle." They know Republicans are greasing the skids for Agenda 2030 rather than lying down on the tracks to stop it.

The truth is this sort of deal is not rare at all. Republicans embrace the corporate masters with at least as much zeal as the Democrats. Oklahoma Republican Kevin Stitt already admitted his state has gotten in on the green energy scam because that’s where the “investments” lie. Thus, even on an issue where ideologically Republicans claim to oppose the Democrat policies, they will dance to the tune of the corporate monopolies that stand to benefit from the Great Reset. So what exactly will change with McConnell managing the flow of business on the floor instead of Chuck Schumer?