MARCH 17, 2017
The Jewish Voice
OP-ED
PAGE 19
Trump's Wall Is Already Paid For By: Daniel John Sobieski
C
ritics of the border wall proposed by President Trump have said the cost is prohibitive under current budget and economic conditions, that no way is Mexico going to pay for it, and shifting funds away from the TSA, Coast Guard, and FEMA are counterproductive in terms of national security. These criticisms ignore the costs to the U.S. in terms other than money — increased crime, overtaxed law enforcement, the drain on public resources such as education, medical care, etc., and the driving down of real wages through an endless supply of cheap labor. In fact, thanks in large part to the mere threat of the wall, the sudden enforcement of existing law, and the stripping of funding from sanctuary cities by President Trump, illegal immigration has plummeted by 40 percent in February, a trend that if continued will reduce the costs and burdens of illegal immigration to the point that the benefits of enhanced border security, including the wall, will be more than paid for. As the New York Post noted: The number of illegal immigrants crossing into the United States from Mexico declined by 40 percent from January to February, Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly said on Wednesday.
The downturn came after President Donald Trump took office on Jan. 20 vowing to deport many of the estimated 11 million illegal immigrants in the United States… He said the U.S. Customs and Border Protection agency, which compiled the data, historically sees a 10 percent to 20 percent increase in apprehensions of illegal immigrants from January to February… “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. President Trump has shown that border security is not that hard. It merely requires willpower and resolve that puts the impact of illegal immigration on America and its citizens above the impact on the political fortunes of pandering politicians. Now comes a study from the Center for Immigration Studies showing that this ongoing reduction in illegal immigration will reduce related costs to the point the wall is paid for: President Donald Trump’s border wall only needs to stop about 10 percent of illegal crossing in order to pay for itself, according to an analysis by the Center for Immigration Studies. The estimated $12 to $15 billion cost of the wall would quickly be offset by the
savings to the government if fewer illegal immigrants arrive in the country over the next decade, CIS found. Only a small portion of the population of people who are expected to attempt an illegal crossing in the next decade — between 9 and 12 percent — would have to be
cost of providing benefits such as education and health care. Critics say the costs of illegal immigration fall largely on state and local governments and it is a federal government burdened with debt that has to write the checks. But the costs in either case are born by the
The Secure Fence Act of 2006 required the construction of 700 miles of new border fence along the 2,000-mile U.S.-Mexico border.
stopped for the wall to totally pay for itself. The analysis from CIS, a group that advocates for moderating immigration levels, relies on fiscal estimates from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine (NAS) for the average cost to taxpayers of illegal immigrants. NAS estimates one illegal immigrant costs state and local governments approximately $75,000 in a lifetime, taking into account taxes paid and the
American taxpayer and the American worker. Ask Kate Steinle’s father what the true costs of illegal immigration are and who pays for them. Trump was able to begin immediate construction of the border wall and opening up bidding for contracts thanks to a 2006 measure signed into law by President George W. Bush and supported by Democrats including then-senators Barack Obama, Joe Biden, and Hillary Clinton.
Democrats are already grumbling about Donald Trump’s proposed border wall, though Barack Obama and other leaders in their party voted not so long ago for George W. Bush’s proposal to build a major wall on the border with Mexico. Bush signed the proposal into law in 2006, after it was passed by huge bipartisan majorities in the House and Senate. The law ordered the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to construct about 700 miles of fencing along the southern border, and authorized the addition of lights and cameras and sensors to enhance security. The law explicitly required the wall to be constructed of “at least two layers of reinforced fencing.” Two-thirds of the Republican-led House approved the bill, including 64 Democrats, and 80 of 100 senators approved the bill in the Senate. Then Sens. Barack Obama, Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton were among the 26 Democrats who approved the bill. Supporters also included Sen. Chuck Schumer, who is set to take over leadership of the Senate for Democrats in 2016. The Secure Fence Act of 2006 required the construction of 700 miles of new border fence along the 2,000-mile U.S.-Mexico border. “The Secretary of Homeland Security shall provide for at least two layers of reinforced fencing, the installation of additional physical bar-
Critics say the costs of illegal immigration fall largely on state and local governments and it is a federal government burdened with debt that has to write the checks riers, roads, lighting, cameras and sensors…” the act said. It was to be modeled on the success of the border barriers in the San Diego sector of the U.S. border. The operative word was “secure.” Instead of this two-layer secure fence what has been built consists of flimsy pedestrian fencing or vehicle fencing consisting of posts people can slither through. The two-tier fence in San Diego runs 14 miles along the border with Tijuana, Mexico. The first layer is a high steel fence, with an inner high anti-climb fence with a no-man’s land in between. It has been amazingly effective. According to a 2005 report by the Congressional Research Service, illegal alien apprehensions in the San Diego sector dropped from 202,000 in 1992 to 9,000 in 2004. Cameras and sensors played a part but the emphasis was on physical barriers and roads that were patrolled by real live border guards, not by robots. Then in 2006 the Democrats took back Congress and, in 2008, the White House. See Trump's Wall Is Already , page 37
Obama’s Wiretaps? – Part II Details of a Watergate-style conspiracy against Trump emerge By: Matthew Vadum (CONTINUED FROM LAST WEEK)
I
n response to Trump’s claim, the increasingly wacky Stephens tweeted Saturday, “When will Republicans acknowledge that the President of the United States is mentally ill?” Most mainstream journalists were loath over the past eight years to call the exhaustively documented and at times baldfaced lies and misdeeds of President Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, Secretaries of State Hillary Clinton and John Kerry, National Security Advisor Susan Rice, Attorneys General Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch, and HHS Secretary Sebelius. It would seem uncovering government corruption is only a journalist’s duty when a Republican resides at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. While it may be true that Trump offered little supporting evidence on Twitter – he provided some evidence by tweeting that an earlier request for sur-
WikiLeaks offered a refresher course in Obama’s treachery on Twitter Sunday, noting that “Obama has a history of tapping & hacking his friends and rivals[,]” and providing plenty of examples.
veillance was turned down by a court – it does not follow, nor is it true, that there is no evidence of his claim. In reality the evidence does exist that Obama spied on Trump and it is "overwhelming," according to talk show host and Landmark Legal Foundation president Mark Levin. He explained on "Fox and Friends" Sunday that evidence of secret court-approved eavesdropping of Trump Tower had already been reported months ago by the New York Times, McClatchy media outlets, Heat Street, and the U.K.-based Guardian newspaper. Levin said: Donald Trump is the victim. His campaign is the victim. His transition team is the victim. His surrogates are the victim. These are police state tactics. I am telling you this as a former chief of staff to an attorney general. If this had been done to Barack Obama all hell would break loose, and it should. Let’s recount what former British Member of Parliament Louise Mensch reported at Heat Street on Nov. 7, the day before the U.S. election. Two separate sources with links to the counter-intelligence community have confirmed to Heat Street that the FBI sought, and was granted, a FISA court warrant in October, giving counter-intelligence permission to examine the activities of ‘U.S. persons’ in Don-
ald Trump’s campaign with ties to Russia. Contrary to earlier reporting in the New York Times, which cited FBI sources as saying that the agency did not believe that the private server in Donald Trump’s Trump Tower which was connected to a Russian bank had any nefarious purpose, the FBI’s counter-intelligence arm, sourc-
but the second was drawn more narrowly and was granted in October after evidence was presented of a server, possibly related to the Trump campaign, and its alleged links to two banks; SVB Bank and Russia’s Alfa Bank. While the Times story speaks of metadata, sources suggest that a FISA warrant was granted to look at the full content of emails and other related documents that may concern US persons.
In reality the evidence does exist that Obama spied on Trump and it is "overwhelming," according to talk show host and Landmark Legal Foundation president Mark Levin (pictured above). He explained on "Fox and Friends" Sunday that evidence of secret court-approved eavesdropping of Trump Tower had already been reported months ago by the New York Times, McClatchy media outlets, Heat Street, and the U.K.based Guardian newspaper.
es say, re-drew an earlier FISA court request around possible financial and banking offenses related to the server. The first request, which, sources say, named Trump, was denied back in June,
The FBI agents who talked to the New York Times, and rubbished the ground-breaking stories of Slate (Franklin Foer) and Mother Jones (David Corn) may not have known about the
FISA warrant, sources say, because the counter-intelligence and criminal sides of the FBI often work independently of each other employing the principle of ‘compartmentalization’. Both of the FISA court applications should be made public and Congress should be given the daily intelligence briefings over the last year or so, Levin said. We already knew that days before Trump’s inauguration, it was reported that Obama green-lighted a disturbing relaxation of the rules regulating the National Security Agency’s ability to circulate globally intercepted personal communications among the other 16 intelligence agencies, some of which are more politicized than the NSA, before applying important longstanding privacy-protection protocols. Before the policy was altered, the NSA screened out the identities of innocent people and irrelevant personal information before passing intercepted communications along to other agencies like the CIA or the FBI’s intelligence units. Put another way, 17 days before President Trump was sworn in, NSA was unleashed against his embryonic administration, newly empowered to share raw intelligence gathered from telephone calls and emails that go through network switches outside the country, as well as messages between people outside the U.S. that go through domestic network switches. WikiLeaks offered a refresh-
er course in Obama’s treachery on Twitter Sunday, noting that “Obama has a history of tapping & hacking his friends and rivals[,]” and providing plenty of examples. The newly discovered Trump Tower scandal further undermines the Left’s false narrative painting Trump as fascistic. After all, Obama, not Trump, was the great, power-mad centralizer using heavy-handed tactics and the vast resources of the federal Leviathan against his enemies, including Trump. As hardcore Never Trumper David French has been forced to admit, Trump is “less authoritarian than Obama.” Trump’s administration, “through policy or personnel, appears to be signaling that the executive branch intends to become less intrusive in American life and more accountable to internal and external critique.” And despite the growing mass media hysteria, there is still no publicly available evidence the Trump campaign somehow colluded with the Russian government last year. Sources in newspaper articles are never identified. There is not a scintilla of proof of improper conduct. All we have is the alleged say-so of faceless CIA spooks whose motives are questionable, to put it charitably. As more evidence surfaces of Obama’s under-handed surveillance of Trump, it should become crystal clear who the real authoritarian is. (FRONTPAGEMAG