Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

Daily Caller

‘Explore Every Action Necessary’: Here’s How Trump Admin, GOP May Change Fight Against Mexican Cartels

Published

7 minute read

 

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By Jason Hopkins

“When I am back in the White House, the drug kingpins and vicious traffickers will never sleep soundly again.”

The Trump transition team and congressional Republicans have promised an unprecedented immigration crackdown, which could also include a novel approach to combating drug cartels.

President-elect Donald Trump’s immigration platform includes a number of hardline measures, such as resuming construction on the U.S.-Mexico border wall, reviving the Remain in Mexico program for asylum seekers, conducting the largest deportation operation in U.S. history and a number of other hawkish proposals. Trump allies and upcoming administration officials have also called on the U.S. to officially designate key drug cartels as terrorist organizations, which would open more resources to combating the crime syndicates that have long sowed chaos at the southern border.

“The drug cartels are waging war on America — and it’s now time for America to wage war on the cartels,” then-candidate Trump said in December 2023, and declared that his plan to fight the cartels included designating them as foreign terrorist organizations.

“Millions and millions of families and people are being destroyed,” he continued. “When I am back in the White House, the drug kingpins and vicious traffickers will never sleep soundly again.”

Nearly a year after that announcement was made, Trump is now due to return to the White House for a non-consecutive second term, bringing his proposal for cartels far closer to reality.

Former Immigration and Customs Enforcement acting director Tom Homan — who Trump recently tapped to serve as his immigration czar — declared that he’d like to see cartels be given the terrorist designation, having said in a news interview in November that they have “killed more Americans than every terrorist organization in the world combined.”

A foreign terrorist organization (FTO) designation by the State Department — which has so far been mostly applied to Islamic terrorist groups that pose a significant threat to American security — would trigger U.S. authorization to freeze financial assets, prohibit entry into the country and prosecute members for supporting terrorism. The proposal itself is not new, as it’s been championed by border hawks over the years.

“What we need to do is make sure that legally we are approaching cartels as the dangerous organizations that they are, and I think an FTO designation is appropriate,” Texas Rep. Chip Roy said to the Daily Caller News Foundation.

Roy was an early proponent in the House of Representatives for this action, having introduced legislation in 2019 that called on then-Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to designate cartels as terrorists. The Texas lawmaker introduced a bill in 2023 that called for the Gulf Cartel, Cartel Del Noreste, Cartel de Sinaloa, and Cartel de Jalisco Nueva Generacion to be given the FTO designation.

While the incoming Trump administration appears to be fully on board with this approach, it remains to be seen if it can be done. Trump himself explicitly called for drug cartels to be labeled as terrorists in November 2019 — largely in reaction to the massacre of American Mormons living south of the border by drug lords earlier that month — but those plans never came to fruition in his first term.

The Mexican government has also long opposed the idea of FTO designation for drug cartels, believing the approach to largely be an affront to their national sovereignty.

In a statement to the DCNF, Todd Bensman, who serves as a senior national security fellow for the Center for Immigration Studies, said he doesn’t “outright oppose the idea” of an FTO designation, but noted that a cartel organization can employ tens of thousands of individuals. For this reason, careful scope would be needed so U.S. officials are not overwhelmed as they carry out their counterterrorism mission.

Roy argued that a specific FTO designation isn’t completely necessary, but some sort of formal action is needed in order to fully take on the threat of these drug cartels.

“We can get hung up with words and designations and whatever,” the Texas lawmaker said. “Alright, if you want to come up with a special designation that’s the equivalent, then so be it.”

“But the bottom line is that we need to designate them as the dangers that they are and then be able to take action with the full tools at our disposal,” Roy continued. “We need to explore every action necessary to stop them.”

On Election Day, Republicans won control of not only the White House and the Senate, but also maintained their majority in the House of Representatives, which will allow the Trump administration to more freely foment its agenda to control illegal immigration and tackle crime emanating south of the U.S.-Mexico border. Roy urged lawmakers to get behind the White House to push these goals over the finish line.

“What we need is the executive branch to act and we need the legislature to give the executive branch the tools necessary to act,” Roy said. “We can’t blink. We need to move now.”

Daily Caller

Is Ukraine Peace Deal Doomed Before Zelenskyy And Trump Even Meet At Mar-A-Lago?

Published on

 

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By Wallace White

As Ukraine and the U.S. try one more time to reach agreement on terms for a peace deal to end the war with Russia, questions remain about whether a resolution is still possible after multiple stalled rounds of negotiations.

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy of Ukraine is set to meet with President Donald Trump at Mar-a-Lago on Sunday to discuss the current proposal for ending the war. The terms and language of the proposed deal have undergone substantial revisions since it was first presented in November, largely due to objections from Ukraine and other European powers.

Despite multiple rounds of peace negotiations fizzling out over the past year, foreign policy and defense experts told the Daily Caller News Foundation that Trump still has a chance to make peace if he can convince Putin that the cost of waging war outweighs the benefits, but that it’s unlikely any of the parties will leave the table satisfied.

Dear Readers:

As a nonprofit, we are dependent on the generosity of our readers.

Please consider making a small donation of any amount here.

Thank you!

“The President’s team sees that stark reality, but also envisions a golden future for Ukraine once the fighting stops—a prosperous, strong, independent nation could rise from the ashes we see today,” Morgan Murphy, former Trump White House official and current Republican Senate candidate in Alabama, told the DCNF. “To get there will take a deal that likely leaves all parties—Ukraine, Russia, and Europe—unhappy when they leave the negotiation table.”

While Russia has signaled some willingness to make compromises, most recently saying it would accept Ukrainian European Union membership, Putin has so far not agreed to any ceasefire in the interim. U.S. officials previously told the DCNF that they resolved “90%” of the issues between Russia and Ukraine in the new deal, but stopped short of elaborating on the outstanding issues.

Zelenskyy expressed cautious optimism about his ongoing talks with Trump’s team in an X post on Christmas Day, but emphasized that a few “sensitive issues” still need to be worked out. While those points of contention weren’t specifically named, Ukraine has long objected to any territorial concessions to Russia and has sought additional security guarantees from the U.S. and European allies.

A number of foreign policy experts, including those who spoke to the Daily Caller News Foundation, warn that excessive concessions to Moscow could embolden U.S. adversaries around the world, including China.

“A rushed or weak settlement would do real damage to U.S. national security,” Carrie Filipetti, executive director of the Vandenberg Coalition, told the DCNF. “It would tell Putin that aggression pays and signal to adversaries like China that borders and sovereignty are negotiable. That is not peace, it is an invitation for the next crisis.”

Putin has continued to strike Ukraine relentlessly during ongoing talks, mainly targeting critical energy infrastructure. Despite Putin’s continued push to win militarily in Ukraine, Heather Nauert, a former U.S. State Department spokesperson, told the DCNF that his actions come less from a position of strength and more from desperation to quickly end the war before he is forced to concede.

“While Putin likely still thinks he can win, his actions are those of someone who is increasingly desperate,” Nauert told the DCNF. “With Vladimir Putin, you don’t get peace because you ask nicely; you get peace when he sees he can’t improve his position by continuing to wage his war. History shows that Moscow only takes negotiations seriously when the pressure is real and sustained.”

Despite projecting resolve publicly, Moscow has paid a staggering price for its war in Ukraine, with various estimates putting casualties among Kremlin forces at no fewer than 600,000. Russia has nevertheless made slow but steady gains on the battlefield, including taking the town of Siversk on Tuesday.

Putin’s government expected a short conflict and swift victory after the initial invasion of Ukraine. But Russian forces were repelled decisively in the 2022 assault on Kyiv, leading to multiple counter-offensives from Ukraine and the resulting protracted war.

Ukraine has held its ground at great cost to itself, needing significant support from the U.S. and Europe. The U.S. has spent over $180 billion on Ukraine since the war began in 2022, and Trump recently signed a bill allocating $800 million of support for Ukraine over the next two years.

Ukraine is dead set on gaining better future security guarantees from the U.S. in exchange for any peace, and U.S. officials previously told the DCNF that the new provisions offer guarantees that function similarly to NATO’s Article 5, promising mutual defense if one is attacked.

“I am not sure he can cut that deal without a commitment to Ukraine, by the U.S. and our allies, that we will stand behind them until a satisfactory peace deal can be made,” Bruce Carlson, retired U.S. Air Force general and former director of the National Reconnaissance Office, told the DCNF. “In recent negotiations with the Ukrainians and other allies [Trump] has made some compromises. Now, with a very confident Putin, he will have to re-sell this new and modified deal.”

Continue Reading

Daily Caller

US Halts Construction of Five Offshore Wind Projects Due To National Security

Published on

 

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By David Blackmon

Interior Secretary Doug Burgum leveled the Trump administration’s latest broadside at the struggling U.S. offshore wind industry on Monday, ordering an immediate suspension of activities at the five big wind projects currently in development.

“Today we’re sending notifications to the five large offshore wind projects that are under construction that their leases will be suspended due to national security concerns,” Burgum told Fox Business host Maria Bartiromo. “During this time of suspension, we’ll work with the companies to try to find a mitigation. But we completed the work that President Trump has asked us to do. The Department of War has come back conclusively that the issues related to these large offshore wind programs have created radar interference that creates a genuine risk for the U.S.”

Predictably, reaction to Burgum’s order was immediate, with opponents of offshore wind praising the move, and industry supporters slamming it. In Semafor’s energy-related newsletter on Tuesday, energy and climate editor Tim McDowell quotes an unnamed ex-Energy Department official as claiming, “the Pentagon and intelligence services, which are normally sensitive to even extremely low-probability risks, never flagged this as a concern previously.” (RELATED: Trump Admin Orders Offshore Wind Farm Pauses Over ‘National Security Risks)

Yet, a simple 30-second Google search finds a wealth of articles going back to as early as October 2014 discussing ways to mitigate the long-ago identified issue of interference with air defense radars by these enormous windmills, some of which are taller than the Eiffel Tower. It is a simple fact that the issue was repeatedly raised during the Biden Administration’s mad rush to speed these giant windmill operations into the construction phase by cutting corners in the permitting process.

In May, 2024, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management’s (BOEM) own analysis related to the Atlantic Shores South project contains a detailed discussion of the potential impacts and suggests multiple ways to mitigate for them. An Oct. 29, 2024 memo of understanding between BOEM and the Biden Department of Defense calls for increased collaboration between the two departments as a response to concerns from members of Congress and others related to these very long-known potential impacts.

The Georgia Tech Research Institute published a study dated June 6, 2022 detailing “Radar Impacts, Potential Mitigation, from Offshore Wind Turbines.” That study was in fact commissioned by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM), a private non-profit that functions as an advisory group to the federal government.

Oh.

report published in February 2024 by International Defense Security & Technology, Inc. describes the known issues thusly:

“Wind turbines can create clutter on radar screens in a number of ways. First, the metal towers and blades of wind turbines can reflect radar signals. This can create false returns on radar screens, which can make it difficult to detect and track real targets.

“Second, the rotating blades of wind turbines can create a Doppler effect on radar signals. This can cause real targets to appear to be moving at different speeds than they actually are. This can also make it difficult to track real targets.”

The simple Google search I conducted returns hundreds of articles dating all the way back to 2006 related to this long-known yet unresolved issue that could present a very real threat to national security. The fact that the Biden administration, in its religious zeal to speed these enormous offshore industrial projects into the construction phase, chose to downplay and ignore this threat in no way obligates his successor in office to commit the same dereliction of duty.

Some wind proponents are cynically raising concerns that a future Democratic administration could use this example as justification for cancelling oil and gas projects. It’s as if they’ve all forgotten about the previous four years of the Autopen presidency, which featured Joe Biden’s Day 1 order cancelling the 80% completed Keystone XL pipeline, a year-long moratorium on LNG export permitting, an attempt to set aside more than 200 million acres of the U.S. offshore from future leasing, and too many other destructive moves to detail here.

Again, a simple web search reveals that experts all over the world believe this is a real problem. If so, it needs to be addressed as a matter of national security. Burgum is intent on doing that. All half-baked talking points aside, this really isn’t complicated.

David Blackmon is an energy writer and consultant based in Texas. He spent 40 years in the oil and gas business, where he specialized in public policy and communications.

Continue Reading

Trending

X