World News
Mexico emerges as Biden’s immigration Hail Mary on December 29, 2023 at 9:51 pm
The Biden administration is leaning on Mexico to help reduce the number of migrants showing up at the southern border in the face of few and unpalatable policy options stateside.
The White House’s push is straining relations with Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador, who played a key role in implementing former President Trump’s most stringent border policies under threat of tariffs.
López Obrador, who met in Mexico City this week with Secretary of State Antony Blinken, Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas and homeland security adviser Liz Sherwood-Randall, is negotiating from a position of strength because border security has grown into a major U.S. electoral issue ahead of 2024.
“[President Biden] is definitely hoping that Mexico will do something that pushes the numbers down for a few months at least,” said Adam Isacson, director of defense oversight at the Washington Office on Latin America.
Border encounters are reaching all-time highs: In December, the Border Patrol is on track to process a record number of migrants who have crossed the border between ports of entry.
In the first 27 days of the month, Border Patrol processed 225,000 migrants — its highest count ever — according to a report by CBS News.
That’s despite the Biden administration ratcheting up measures intended to deter future migrants from coming to the United States. In its annual report issued Friday, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) touted a 19.5 percent jump in arrests of noncitizens, a majority of whom weren’t accused of criminal actions.
Border crossings stuck to an upward trend even though ICE conducted 170,590 arrests, 96,768 of which were purely administrative, meaning the detainees had no criminal convictions or charges, and conducted 142,580 removals of foreign nationals.
And U.S. border officials are running on fumes, dealing with those record numbers without extra funding the Biden administration requested from Congress, which would have added 1,300 Border Patrol jobs and 1,600 asylum officers.
That funding was included in a supplemental budget request paired with aid for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan that ultimately petered out in Senate negotiations ahead of Christmas because of disagreement over border policy changes requested by Republicans and opposed by many Democrats.
Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), who along with Sens. Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.) and James Lankford (R-Okla.) is leading the talks, said Friday the group has been meeting virtually and will return to the table in the new year, according to a report by Politico.
But those talks are in danger of becoming embroiled in the larger budget fight, as Congress stares down dual government shutdown deadlines in late January and early February.
That gridlock has left Biden with few levers to pull to quickly reduce the number of migrants presenting themselves at the border, a metric for border enforcement success that the administration adopted to the chagrin of immigrant advocates.
Enter López Obrador.
The Mexican president, a loud advocate of addressing the root causes of migration, has nonetheless been a key enforcer of migration controls for the Trump and Biden administrations.
Mexico’s National Guard, a militarized police force created by López Obrador, has turned its focus away from the country’s organized crime crisis and toward migration controls.
“Root causes is a long-term solution, it’s not going to do anything really between now and, say, 2028 at the very earliest. So in the short term, yeah, he’s using deterrence just like everyone else — all these checkpoints, all those National Guard controls,” said Isacson.
According to an analysis of Mexican government data by national newspaper El Economista, the National Guard’s criminal arrest rates dropped 60 percent from 2021 to 2022, while migrant “rescues” grew 432.5 percent in the same period.
Mexican officials dating to previous administrations use the term “rescue” for interactions between migrants and law enforcement; those interactions can include literal rescues from smuggling organizations or physically dangerous situations, but they almost always involve a review of migrants’ documents and can result in deportations.
Through the National Guard and controls at its southern border, Mexico has some influence over the volume of migrants reaching the United States, but López Obrador’s sharpest tool is his ability to decide whether or not he’ll take third-country deportees or expellees from the United States, cooperating on policies such as Title 42 and “remain in Mexico.”
In a sign of the kind of deterrence Biden can expect from López Obrador, Mexican immigration officials bulldozed a migrant encampment in Matamoros, a city across the Rio Grande from Brownsville, Texas, as Blinken and company met with López Obrador almost 500 miles away in Mexico City.
Mexican officials said the camp, which once housed about 1,500 people, was empty, though the migrants dodging the bulldozer said about 200 people remained, according to an Associated Press report.
Neither the Mexican nor U.S. governments offered details about the negotiations between López Obrador and Blinken, instead issuing an almost-boilerplate joint communiqué about the visit that itself created some friction between the two sides.
After Mexico published its version of the joint statement, the White House published a nearly identical version, except that it included the phrase “democratic decline” as a root cause of irregular migration.
By diplomatic protocol, joint communiqués are agreed to word-for-word after negotiation on language.
At the table, U.S. officials did not ask to include “democratic decline” — a phrase Mexico’s opposition understood as a reference to López Obrador’s practices — and uploaded a corrected version of the statement, without the offending phrase, hours later.
A National Security Council spokesperson attributed the gaffe to a “version control issue.”
The diplomatic faux pas highlighted the areas of disagreement between the two countries — mainly on democracy and relations with Cuba and Venezuela — and how far the Biden administration is willing to bend on those issues to get its desired results at the border.
But if those results come through asylum or transit restrictions, whether they’re produced through Mexican collaboration or policy changes forced by Congress, they’re unlikely to have a lasting impact.
Large U.S. border policy shifts tend to drive down border crossings for a period, as was the case in June, when migrant apprehensions dropped significantly after the end of Title 42, but usually bounce back.
And those asylum and transit restrictions can have permanent effects on the migrants on the receiving end.
“There’s nothing here that is better policy. It’s going to hurt people. Six to eight months after it happens, it’ll be a wash anyway, as migrants and smugglers find new ways around it,” said Isacson.
“All this will do — and you’ve seen this repeatedly — is push the numbers down for a few months. Buy a little breathing space.”
The Biden administration is leaning on Mexico to help reduce the number of migrants showing up at the southern border in the face of few and unpalatable policy options stateside. The White House’s push is straining relations with Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador, who played a key role in implementing former President Trump’s most…
News
US May Completely Cut Income Tax Due to Tariff Revenue

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.
News
Epstein Files to Be Declassified After Trump Order

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.

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.
Politics
Netanyahu’s UN Speech Triggers Diplomatic Walkouts and Mass Protests

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.

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.
Advice4 weeks agoHow to Make Your Indie Film Pay Off Without Losing Half to Distributors
Advice1 week agoHow to Find Your Voice as a Filmmaker
Film Industry4 weeks agoWhy Burnt-Out Filmmakers Need to Unplug Right Now
News4 weeks agoHarlem’s Hottest Ticket: Ladawn Mechelle Taylor Live
News1 week agoHow Misinformation Overload Breaks Creative Focus
Entertainment3 weeks agoWhen “Professional” Means Silent
News2 weeks agoFrom Seen to Secured: How Filmmakers Are Owning Their Value
Film Industry3 weeks agoDr. Ric Mathis Turns a Film Screening Into a Lifesaving Movement With Heartbeat




















