It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Maybe Mexico will actually be paying for the wall after all!

page: 1
24
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+9 more 
posted on Apr, 26 2017 @ 09:04 PM
link   
Senator Cruz has a new plan to pay for the wall.

He wants Mexico to pay for it. Mexicans who are profiting from the unprotected border to make money from the drug trade would pay for the wall if his bill passes. In fact, El Chapo alone might pay for most of it.

It sounds like an excellent plan!

The title of the bill is pretty cool too:
Ensuring Lawful Collection of Hidden Assets to Provide Order, or ELCHAPO


Ted Cruz wants El Chapo to pay for Trump’s border wall


The Republican senator from Texas is proposing the US use coc aine-tainted money forfeited by Mexican drug lord Joaquín “El Chapo” Guzmán to pay for President Donald Trump’s proposed wall on the nation’s southern border.

Cruz introduced a bill — called Ensuring Lawful Collection of Hidden Assets to Provide Order, or ELCHAPO — Tuesday that would repurpose $14 billion in assets the feds plan to squeeze out of Guzman to fund the project, Axios first reported.

“Fourteen billion dollars will go a long way toward building a wall that will keep Americans safe and hinder the illegal flow of drugs, weapons, and individuals across our southern border,” he said.




posted on Apr, 26 2017 @ 09:21 PM
link   
This has been the basic idea, I think, all along. Anyone who thought Mexico was going to cut a check was in a fantasy world all along. Mexico will pay for the wall, be it by asset seizure, tariffs, or by savings on having to care for illegal immigrants.

I was initially a Cruz supporter in the election, until he got caught lying. That's when I switched to Trump, because he seemed to be the best of the rest (Rubio might be good when he gets some more experience under his belt). I'm glad to see ol' Ted is finally doing something right again.

The good part of this is that Trump doesn't need to hold up the budget over the wall, and I don't know what anyone, even Pelosi or Schumer, could find to disagree with using assets already forfeited, not earmarked, to correct the damage done by the convicted criminal who caused it.

I'm sure they'll come up with some reason to hate it though. I wonder if their constituents will agree with their reasoning.

TheRedneck



posted on Apr, 26 2017 @ 09:25 PM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

Good point - it will be hard for Democrats to vote against this one.

And it takes the pressure off of the budget stalemate over the wall. I bet Trump was in on this, or saw it coming. People said that he was backing down over the wall cost in the budget, and I suspected that he must have something up his sleeve.



posted on Apr, 26 2017 @ 09:27 PM
link   
a reply to: BlueAjah
If we have seized it isn't it our money?



posted on Apr, 26 2017 @ 09:27 PM
link   
Good idea, won't happen though. Most in Congress couldn't care less about America, they only care about pleasing their corporate masters. If Kate's Law couldn't be passed, this has absolutely no hope of being adopted.



posted on Apr, 26 2017 @ 09:30 PM
link   
This is the full text of the bill:

www.cruz.senate.gov...



posted on Apr, 26 2017 @ 09:31 PM
link   
a reply to: mzinga

Yes.
The bill is intended to reserve the forfeited money specifically for building the wall and border security.
It would apply to others besides El Chapo who are convicted of drug trafficking.



posted on Apr, 26 2017 @ 09:31 PM
link   
They are probably going to find that some crooked US officials already have taken that money.


Half of it is probably already gone. Well, at least they will start to catch some of the crooked officials who took it.



posted on Apr, 26 2017 @ 09:32 PM
link   
a reply to: BlueAjah

Again so if it is our money Mexico isn't paying for it. Spend it on something useful like infrastructure or education.

This is like saying I found 10,000 so I bought a gold toilet. But I didn't pay for it.



posted on Apr, 26 2017 @ 09:32 PM
link   
a reply to: mzinga

It hasn't been seized. The DOJ wants to grab $14 billion (not too specific on how they arrived at that figure). Thing is, some of that seems to belong to Mexico.


"The governments of the United States and Mexico are talking about this issue,” a U.S. diplomatic source told Excelsior. “We hope that if convicted there will be a fair division of goods between the two countries, in accordance to what is predominantly done in this type of cases," he said.

www.foxnews.com...

So, don't be writing no checks quite yet, Ted.

edit on 4/26/2017 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 26 2017 @ 09:35 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

My point is this is similar to RICO statutes and regardless of where the money is now, if we come into possession of the money it becomes ours. We are then still making a fiscal decision to spend the money. It isn't Mexico paying for it.



posted on Apr, 26 2017 @ 09:39 PM
link   
a reply to: mzinga

It is and was money that was going back into Mexico, so taxpayers would not be paying, Mexico would be paying.

Even if we don't get this full amount, the bill includes future forfeitures after convictions of others. There is majorly big money in drug trafficking and human trafficking, so somehow this would pay for a big chunk of our border security.


edit on 4/26/17 by BlueAjah because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 26 2017 @ 09:41 PM
link   
a reply to: BlueAjah




Even if we don't get this full amount, the bill includes future forfeitures after convictions of others.
So, if Mexico gets stiffed on forfeitures, why would they cooperate with the DOJ? The DEA?


I don't think Cruz's bill will get very far.

edit on 4/26/2017 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 26 2017 @ 09:42 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

We can share, and still make out



posted on Apr, 26 2017 @ 09:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: BlueAjah
a reply to: Phage

We can share, and still make out

Mexico isn't going to pay for the stupid wall.



posted on Apr, 26 2017 @ 09:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: mzinga
a reply to: Phage

My point is this is similar to RICO statutes and regardless of where the money is now, if we come into possession of the money it becomes ours. We are then still making a fiscal decision to spend the money. It isn't Mexico paying for it.


That is the purpose of this bill. We would be making a fiscal decision to use the money for border security, which is a major concern to a large portion of the population.

It is especially a concern to those who have lost loved ones to the opioid epidemic, which is killing people every day. Drugs coming from Mexico are killing US citizens.

Illegal immigrants are a burden on our society and are taking our jobs.

Build a wall, increase border security, put up some nice border gates where people can come in legally, and the US will be a better place.



posted on Apr, 26 2017 @ 09:50 PM
link   
That Mexican money will be tied up in the courts for 20 years and the only one's profiting will be the lawyers and the banks themselves.

Essentially the Mexican banks own that money not the state and you can't just call it drug money and take it.

This is just BS grandstanding by Cruz.
edit on 26-4-2017 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 26 2017 @ 09:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage

originally posted by: BlueAjah
a reply to: Phage

We can share, and still make out

Mexico isn't going to pay for the stupid wall.


You know what gets me?

In ancient times they built walls around cities for protection. Where are those walls now?

We've progressed so far



posted on Apr, 26 2017 @ 09:54 PM
link   
a reply to: olaru12

There are already forfeiture laws. That is nothing new. Law enforcement can repossess anything that is a gain of or used for selling drugs.

Most drug dealers in my area rent cars, because they regularly have their cars seized for having drugs in the car.

There are also other crimes that result in asset seizure.
That part of this is not a new thing.

The only new thing is allotting the money from Mexican drug and human traffickers for border security costs.

The Justice Asset Forfeiture Program

Mexico also has their own FEDERAL ASSET FORFEITURE ACT


edit on 4/26/17 by BlueAjah because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 26 2017 @ 09:58 PM
link   
a reply to: BlueAjah




The only new thing is allotting the money from Mexican drug and human traffickers for border security costs.

The bill says nothing about human trafficking. Nor is Mexico singled out. All forfeitures from cartels importing illegal drugs from anywhere would be devoted to the Mexico border.
www.cruz.senate.gov...

It would seem to be in conflict with existing law.
www.justice.gov...
edit on 4/26/2017 by Phage because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
24
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join