Connect with us

World News

Biden stuns allies with border wall bombshell on October 6, 2023 at 9:00 am

Published

on

President Biden’s decision this week to move forward with border wall construction that Democrats have long denounced shocked allies and immigration advocates.

The stunning reversal came just days after administration officials participated in an immigration roundtable at the Capitol featuring Congressional Hispanic Caucus (CHC) members and immigration advocates.

The administration’s participation in the roundtable drew praise from CHC members; administration officials did not mention plans to restart border wall construction.

CHC leaders on Thursday called the decision “disappointing.”

Advertisement

“While this border wall funding was signed into law by President Trump under Republican leadership, this decision is not in line with the current Administration’s commitments to end border wall construction. Republicans remain committed to building border walls that are ineffective, a poor use of taxpayer funds, and a strain on the local environment, endangering families and children who are fleeing from dangerous conditions and that seek legal asylum in the United States,” CHC Chair Nanette Barragán (D-Calif.) said in a statement.

A notice posted on the Federal Register Wednesday waived a series of environmental and historical protection laws to allow for wall construction in Starr County, Texas, using funds appropriated in 2019 for that purpose.

Biden on Thursday told reporters his administration moved forward with the waivers and construction to comply with a legal obligation to use the appropriated funds.

“One question on the border wall: The border wall, money was appropriated for the border wall. I tried to get them to reappropriate, to redirect that money. They didn’t. They wouldn’t,” Biden told reporters in the Oval Office.

Advertisement

“And in the meantime, there’s nothing in the law – they have to use the money for what it was appropriated. I can’t stop that.”

Asked whether he believes the border wall works, Biden sighed, “no.”

His explanation came more than 12 hours after The Associated Press first reported the story, based on the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) quiet announcement in the Federal Registry.

The administration had forewarned some allies such as Rep. Henry Cuéllar (D-Texas) that they would obligate the funds to avoid violating the 1974 Impoundment Control Act, but they omitted a key detail.

Advertisement

“[Biden] tried to divert money, he tried to do everything that he could from my understanding, he tried to transfer and reprogram authorities. So he did a whole bunch of stuff, but it’s only limited to 5 percent of what they could transfer,” said Cuéllar, an appropriator and a fierce opponent of wall construction.

Cuéllar said Biden is “stuck with the Impoundment Control Act,” but raised doubts about the environmental waivers.

“But on a different point — and I’ve been trying to get answers from the administration because we just found out yesterday — why did they waive the environmental laws? That’s something else. And we’ve been trying to get an answer and they can’t give me an answer,” Cuéllar said.

An administration official said new construction will use “Jersey barriers” rather than digging to bury foundations for the planned expansion in an effort to mitigate environmental damage, but otherwise pointed to precedent for the administration’s waiver announcement.

Advertisement

“I’ll just point out that new border barrier construction has never been completed without utilizing the waiver — waiver process. That’s why the waiver process was passed into law, and it’s an essential part in the barrier construction process,” said the official.

“Despite that, we complete thorough environmental surveys and make every effort to comply with the intent of the environmental laws to safeguard the border environment.”

Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas pushed back against criticism that the announcement represented either a policy shift or a contradiction for the administration.

“There is no new Administration policy with respect to border walls. From day one, this Administration has made clear that a border wall is not the answer. That remains our position and our position has never wavered. The language in the Federal Register notice is being taken out of context and it does not signify any change in policy whatsoever,” Mayorkas said in a statement published on X.

Advertisement

But immigration and environmental advocates are livid.

“It’s disheartening to see President Biden stoop to this level, casting aside our nation’s bedrock environmental laws to build ineffective wildlife-killing border walls,” said Laiken Jordahl, Southwest conservation advocate at the Center for Biological Diversity. “Starr County is home to some of the most spectacular and biologically important habitat left in Texas, and now bulldozers are preparing to rip right through it. This is a horrific step backwards for the borderlands.”

The move also fueled criticism and mockery from Republicans and immigration restrictionists who have long denounced Biden’s border policies.

“So interesting to watch Crooked Joe Biden break every environmental law in the book to prove that I was right when I built 560 miles (they incorrectly state 450 in story!) of brand new, beautiful border wall,” former President Trump wrote on Truth Social Thursday.

Advertisement

The chaotic aftermath of the announcement underscores growing political concerns in the administration over immigration and a multitude of forces pulling in different directions.

Many Democrats are wary that perceived contradictions in the administration’s direction and attitudes toward immigrants will rob the party of a strong public platform on the issue.

“We desperately need a positive, aspirational, optimistic narrative around immigration, and Democrats are the ones that should be doing it,” said Kristian Ramos, a Democratic strategist.

“We are the party that is for legal orderly immigration, MAGA Republicans just want to stop everyone from coming in. That’s an important distinction here,” added Ramos.

Advertisement

The abrupt changes are also raising questions about the administration’s internal deliberations.

“The best way I can explain it is that these are internal forces inside the Biden White House that are reacting to [high immigration numbers] and not taking into consideration the ugly, visceral negative reaction that Biden supporters in the Latino community are going to have against this action,” said former Rep. Luis Gutiérrez (D-Ill.), who is leading a push for Biden to take a more aggressive posture in favor of immigration reform.

“It’s not going to be received with applause and happiness. Quite the opposite. There’s going to be a great degree of sadness, and then anger that they took the steps.”

​ President Biden’s decision this week to move forward with border wall construction that Democrats have long denounced shocked allies and immigration advocates. The stunning reversal came just days after administration officials participated in an immigration roundtable at the Capitol featuring Congressional Hispanic Caucus (CHC) members and immigration advocates. The administration’s participation in the roundtable drew praise… 

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

News

US May Completely Cut Income Tax Due to Tariff Revenue

Published

on

President Donald Trump says the United States might one day get rid of federal income tax because of money the government collects from tariffs on imported goods. Tariffs are extra taxes the U.S. puts on products that come from other countries.

What Trump Is Saying

Trump has said that tariff money could become so large that it might allow the government to cut income taxes “almost completely.” He has also talked about possibly phasing out income tax over the next few years if tariff money keeps going up.

How Taxes Work Now

Right now, the federal government gets much more money from income taxes than from tariffs. Income taxes bring in trillions of dollars each year, while tariffs bring in only a small part of that total. Because of this gap, experts say tariffs would need to grow by many times to replace income tax money.

Questions From Experts

Many economists and tax experts doubt that tariffs alone could pay for the whole federal budget. They warn that very high tariffs could make many imported goods more expensive for shoppers in the United States. This could hit lower- and middle‑income families hardest, because they spend a big share of their money on everyday items.

What Congress Must Do

The president can change some tariffs, but only Congress can change or end the federal income tax. That means any real plan to remove income tax would need new laws passed by both the House of Representatives and the Senate. So far, there is no detailed law or full budget plan on this idea.

What It Means Right Now

For now, Trump’s comments are a proposal, not a change in the law. People and businesses still have to pay federal income tax under the current rules. The debate over using tariffs instead of income taxes is likely to continue among lawmakers, experts, and voters.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Epstein Files to Be Declassified After Trump Order

Published

on


Former President Donald Trump has signed an executive order directing federal agencies to declassify all government files related to Jeffrey Epstein, the disgraced financier whose death in 2019 continues to fuel controversy and speculation.

The order, signed Wednesday at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate, instructs the FBI, Department of Justice, and intelligence agencies to release documents detailing Epstein’s network, finances, and alleged connections to high-profile figures. Trump described the move as “a step toward transparency and public trust,” promising that no names would be shielded from scrutiny.

“This information belongs to the American people,” Trump said in a televised statement. “For too long, powerful interests have tried to bury the truth. That ends now.”

U.S. intelligence officials confirmed that preparations for the release are already underway. According to sources familiar with the process, the first batch of documents is expected to be made public within the next 30 days, with additional releases scheduled over several months.

Reactions poured in across the political spectrum. Supporters praised the decision as a bold act of accountability, while critics alleged it was politically motivated, timed to draw attention during a volatile election season. Civil rights advocates, meanwhile, emphasized caution, warning that some records could expose private victims or ongoing legal matters.

The Epstein case, which implicated figures in politics, business, and entertainment, remains one of the most talked-about scandals of the past decade. Epstein’s connections to influential individuals—including politicians, royals, and executives—have long sparked speculation about the extent of his operations and who may have been involved.

Advertisement

Former federal prosecutor Lauren Fields said the release could mark a turning point in public discourse surrounding government transparency. “Regardless of political stance, this declassification has the potential to reshape how Americans view power and accountability,” Fields noted.

Officials say redactions may still occur to protect sensitive intelligence or personal information, but the intent is a near-complete disclosure. For years, critics of the government’s handling of Epstein’s case have accused agencies of concealing evidence or shielding elites from exposure. Trump’s order promises to change that narrative.

As anticipation builds, journalists, legal analysts, and online commentators are preparing for what could be one of the most consequential information releases in recent history.

Continue Reading

Politics

Netanyahu’s UN Speech Triggers Diplomatic Walkouts and Mass Protests

Published

on

What Happened at the United Nations

On Friday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addressed the United Nations General Assembly in New York City, defending Israel’s ongoing military operations in Gaza. As he spoke, more than 100 delegates from over 50 countries stood up and left the chamber—a rare and significant diplomatic walkout. Outside the UN, thousands of protesters gathered to voice opposition to Netanyahu’s policies and call for accountability, including some who labeled him a war criminal. The protest included activists from Palestinian and Jewish groups, along with international allies.

Why Did Delegates and Protesters Walk Out?

The walkouts and protests were a response to Israel’s continued offensive in Gaza, which has resulted in widespread destruction and a significant humanitarian crisis. Many countries and individuals have accused Israel of excessive use of force, and some international prosecutors have suggested Netanyahu should face investigation by the International Criminal Court for war crimes, including claims that starvation was used as a weapon against civilians. At the same time, a record number of nations—over 150—recently recognized the State of Palestine, leaving the United States as the only permanent UN Security Council member not to join them.

International Reaction and Significance

The diplomatic walkouts and street protests demonstrate increasing global concern over the situation in Gaza and growing support for Palestinian statehood. Several world leaders, including Colombia’s President Gustavo Petro, showed visible solidarity with protesters. Petro called for international intervention and, controversially, for US troops not to follow orders he viewed as supporting ongoing conflict. The US later revoked Petro’s visa over his role in the protests, which he argued was evidence of a declining respect for international law.

BILATERAL MEETING WITH THE PRIME MINISTER OF ISRAEL Photo credit: Matty STERN/U.S. Embassy Jerusalem

Why Is This News Important?

The Gaza conflict is one of the world’s most contentious and closely-watched issues. It has drawn strong feelings and differing opinions from governments, activists, and ordinary people worldwide. The United Nations, as an international organization focused on peace and human rights, is a key arena for these debates. The events surrounding Netanyahu’s speech show that many nations and voices are urging new action—from recognition of Palestinian rights to calls for sanctions against Israel—while discussion and disagreement over the best path forward continue.

This episode at the UN highlights how international diplomacy, public protests, and official policy are all intersecting in real time as the search for solutions to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict remains urgent and unresolved.

Continue Reading

Trending

Subscribe for the updates!