Should foreign governments be allowed to support or fund lawsuits against the US government over its immigration and enforcement policies? US sovereign immunity aside, the very idea of foreigners trying to influence American immigration law through indirect civil suits sounds insane. Why, oh why, should Americans care what Mexico thinks?
To put the issue in context, it's important to understand that the Mexican government has been actively encouraging and enabling mass illegal immigration into the US for decades. This strategy accomplishes a few things simultaneously:
First, the southern border acts as a steam valve for poverty stricken malcontents and criminals. Mexican leaders like to have the option of leaving the door open to citizens crossing illegally into the US en masse because this means less mouths to feed, less strain on social services and less crime for Mexico.
Second, the Mexican economy relies heavily on foreign remittances. Illegals from Mexico enter the US, work under the table, then wire around $64 billion back home every year. Mexico's annual federal welfare programs cost only $57 billion per year. In other words, remittances from migrants in the US are bigger than Mexico's entire welfare budget.
It has become increasingly clear since Donald Trump took office in 2025 that far too many third-world countries are using the US as a cash cow for their own national economies. And, they have been doing this primarily through illegal immigration, or, work visa and refugee loopholes. Without Trump's migrant crackdown, this problem may have never been exposed to the wider public.
Third, mass immigration acts as a destabilizing element in US politics and economics. There are many socialist elements within Mexico, not to mention Central and South America, who would like to quietly sabotage the US to make way for "La Raza" - An ideological movement of Hispanic activists that wants to invade and reconquer North America.
They aren't satisfied with simply bleeding the US for a trickle of wealth. Rather, like any group of barbarians at the gate, they want to pillage the entire country because they live under the delusion that they're "owed" something. This agenda, of course, relies heavily on progressive politicians staying in power in the US, which is not currently the case.
Claudia Sheinbaum said on Thursday that her government plans to file criminal complaints in the U.S. regarding Mexican citizens who have died in immigration custody or while being targeted in anti-immigration operations. The goal is to escalate these complaints while supporting civil suits. Fourteen Mexican nationals have died while in the custody of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and three more died in arrest operations conducted by the agency, the Mexican government said.
The latest incident in Houston involved an arrest which was disrupted by a Mexican migrant who was not the original target of the operation. Agents report that the man tried to ram them with his van while they were looking for a different suspect.
Lorenzo Araujo, a Mexican immigrant who had lived in the United States without authorization for 35 years, was on his way to work with three other men. When agents tried to stop the vehicle, the encounter quickly escalated when he allegedly tried to run them over. An agent shot Mr. Araujo in the abdomen. He died at a hospital hours later. Suspects generally only end up dead when they present a physical threat to ICE agents.
Mexico's president intends to exploit these events as a way to rally lawfare operations. She seems to believe that she can leverage against deportation policies by burying the Trump Administration in litigation. She's not alone. Democrats are also using similar tactics while ignoring the circumstances of the shootings and the self defense of immigration agents.
Democrat Rep. Al Green says Americans are obligated to give illegal aliens protection under the Constitution: "Mr. Arajo belongs to us! He should not receive any less attention from the Constitution that I or any of you would receive!" pic.twitter.com/3rW5DFgQoA
— TheBlaze (@theblaze) July 10, 2026When it comes to deportations, illegal immigrants do not have the same constitutional protections as American citizens. Due process for migrants only involves identifying them as legal or illegal. If they are illegal, then they can and should be kicked out of the country with haste. No trial. No jury. No wasted time or wasted taxpayer money.
It makes no sense that Democrats under the Biden Administration can open the borders to millions of illegals without any legal checks and balances, then they demand that the Trump Administration pursue years of court cases to remove just a handful.
Meanwhile, it's obvious that Mexico's government has every reason to subvert the deportation process. By labeling it a "human rights violation" and creating a legal fog, the Mexicans, like the Democrats, are hoping they can stall the accelerating deportations so that their economy can continue to benefit from the parasitic relationship they have with the US.
Mexico's only goal is to create as many obstacles as possible with the expectation that Democrats will eventually return to power and open the floodgates once again.
Tyler Durden Sun, 07/12/2026 - 12:15Authored by James Howard Kunstler,
"Witness list expanding in multi-conspiracy probe out of Fort Pierce. . . ."
- Paul Sperry, Real Clear investigations.
The scene: February of 2027, a federal courtroom in Fort Pierce (St. Lucie County), Florida, the third day of trial in the RussiaGate matter.
Defendants seated on the right (from the judge’s vantage) are so numerous they require two tables, including John Brennan, James Comey, James Clapper, Andrew McCabe, Rod Rosenstein, Strzok & Page, Bruce Ohr, Lisa Monaco, Mary McCord, Christopher Wray, Marc Elias, and seven other former federal officials.
Former President Barack Obama and former Sec’y of State Hillary Clinton, named as “unindicted co-conspirators,” are not present in the courtroom for the sake of decorum. Former MI6 agent, the slippery Christopher Steele, purveyor of the infamous “dossier,” is on-the-lam, whereabouts unknown. The charges against the bunch are Seditious Conspiracy (18 U.S. Code § 2384), Conspiracy to Obstruct Justice (18 U.S.C. §§ 1503, 1512, 1519), Conspiracy Against Rights / Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law (18 U.S.C. §§ 241, 242), Perjury (18 U.S.C. § 1621), Concealment (18 U.S.C. § 1001).
At 10:00 a.m., a “surprise” witness is ushered into the room...
Gasps erupt from all angles.
The witness is immediately identified by his snow-white hair and beard. Everybody sees it is Julian Assange. He is a surprise witness for security reasons. He has been flown from Sydney to New Delhi to Frankfurt, and finally to Miami in a US government airplane, the lone passenger.
Recall: in June 2024, Assange reached a plea deal with the US DOJ: guilty on one count of conspiring to obtain and disclose classified US national defense information. He was sentenced to sixty-two months (time served), crediting the approximately five years he had already spent in Britain’s Belmarsh prison while fighting extradition — but not counting the six years and ten months he was holed-up before that in the Ecuadorian embassy in London. There was no additional jail time, supervision, or financial penalty.
Assange is sworn and seated, led through preliminary questions as to his identity, place of residence, his former occupation running the news service known as Wikileaks, blah blah. The prosecuting federal attorney will now turn to the subject of one Seth Rich — remember him? The twenty-seven-year-old was working for the Democratic National Committee (DNC) in 2016 as Voter Expansion Data Director. At 4:00 a.m. July 10, 2016, Rich was found dead, shot twice in the back, on Flagler Place NW, in the Bloomingdale neighborhood of Washington, D.C., in what police called “a botched robbery.”
Rather bizarrely from a police procedural standpoint, Rich’s wallet, stuffed with money, his watch, and his cell phone remained on his person. Only his laptop was taken in the “robbery.” It has been a “cold,” unsolved case all these years.
Sometime before the murder, as early as Spring 2016, well before the Democratic party’s nominating convention, Assange’s Wikileaks received a large packet of information containing as many as 58,000 emails hacked out of the account of John Podesta, Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman. The emails detailed many curious machinations inside the DNC that year, including sketchy efforts underway to derail Clinton’s rival, Bernie Sanders, excerpts from Clinton’s paid private Wall Street speeches (e.g., to Goldman Sachs), references to Clinton’s health problems, her private email server issue, various Clinton foundation dealings, and a lot of strange chatter about “pizza” and other mundane food items that would eventually spawn the “PizzaGate” story alluding to alleged child sex cult activities centered around John Podesta and his brother Tony.
It was quite a juicy load. But Wikileaks sat on it until just before the election. That spring and summer, Hillary was already laboring under the scandal about the private email server she had set up in her suburban Chappaqua, NY, home. She had apparently used it casually when she ran the State Department to conduct official government business, including classified information, instead of her official government email address. That itself was against the law, apart from what else the content of the Podesta email trove revealed. The FBI had been working the server case that spring, and just weeks before the convention, FBI Director Jim Comey made a big public show of exonerating Hillary, declaring incorrectly that he declined to prosecute — since it is not the FBI’s job to prosecute, only investigate, and for the DOJ to actually decide whether to prosecute. But he did add for the record that her doings had been “extremely careless.”
Anyway, Comey’s blunder became a low-grade scandal unto itself, colored by the suspicious meeting a month earlier between Bill Clinton and then Attorney General Loretta Lynch in her official airplane parked on the tarmac of the Phoenix airport. Both claimed they just talked about their grandchildren. Hence, Comey letting Hillary off the hook in July had the odor of a set-up. She was duly nominated July 26, 2016.
In October, 2016, Wikileaks began dribbling out the hacked Podesta emails they had obtained earlier that year, just in time for the election. To complicate things, the FBI and the New York City police were just then investigating former Rep. Anthony Weiner, husband of Clinton’s closest aide Huma Abedin, for sending sexually explicit messages to a minor. In the course of things, they obtained Weiner’s laptop, which was stuffed with 140,000 additional emails between Ms. Abedin and Hillary. Yikes!
On October 28, 2016 (eleven days before the election), Comey sent a letter to Congress notifying them that the FBI was reviewing these newly discovered emails to determine if they contained classified information (they did), in effect re-opening Hillary’s private server case. Comey later testified he felt obligated to inform Congress to avoid accusations of a cover-up close to the election. He called it a “no-win situation.” On November 6, 2016 (two days before Election Day), Comey announced the review found no new evidence warranting charges, reaffirming the July conclusion.
All of this intrigue revolved around the question of who, exactly, hacked those DNC emails. In June 2016, a cyber-security outfit called CrowdStrike, run by former FBI agent Shawn Henry, identified two Russian intelligence-linked groups — Cozy Bear and Fancy Bear — as responsible for the DNC hack. By that time, the Steele Dossier was already circulating between the CIA, the FBI, and the White House. The Russia collusion story (the RussiaGate hoax) was busy being born. Russia Russia Russia !!! It was all the people of the USA heard the whole four years of the first Trump term.
Which brings us forward to the courtroom scene, February, 2027, Julian Assange in the witness chair. The young lead federal prosecutor (one of several) in the room, finishes his preliminary questions and asks Assange: “Are you willing to tell the court now, who exactly was your source for the DNC emails?” Assange has kept it secret for all these years. But he had been very badly abused by some of the very US government officials who are sitting at the two defendant’s tables, and he is rather sore about all the years he had to hide out in the Ecuadorean embassy in London before the Americans induced the British authorities to stuff him in Belmarsh prison for another five.
“Yes,” he says placidly.
“It was a young man named Seth Rich. He copied it onto a thumb-drive directly from the DNC.”
And that is how all the bullshit about RussiaGate finally dissolves into a rancid cloud of sedition for the folks slumped in their seats on the defendants’ side of the courtroom.
Shout out to the valiant podcaster Mel K for pointing us in the right direction on this one.
Tyler Durden Sun, 07/12/2026 - 11:40President Trump's declaration from the NATO summit in Turkey this week saying that he'll give Ukraine a license to produce Patriot defense systems has been met with a lot of skepticism, both among Ukrainians and internationally.
"We’ll give them the right to make Patriots. We’ll show them how to do it," Trump had said. "I think they can produce them pretty quickly."
via Associated PressZelensky seized on the opening, telling reports on Thursday, "America has recognized Ukraine as a country that is ready to do this" and urged Ukrainian and American officials to now work "without pauses" to finalize the licensing arrangements.
Immediately the Associated Press raised some relevant questions, such as: What exactly would Ukraine be allowed to produce?... also while pointing out that under the best conditions, getting such production off the ground would take 'years'. It wrote:
Anatolii Khrapchynskyi, development director of the Fly Group Ukraine defense company, said Trump’s wording was ambiguous because he referred broadly to producing “Patriots,” without specifying whether he meant missiles, launchers, radar systems, command centers or components.
Missile production alone involves a vast supply chain, Khrapchynskyi said, with hundreds of companies making parts such as control surfaces, engines, guidance systems and communications equipment.
Following this, on Saturday Ukrainian economist and financial analyst Alexey Kushch - considered an expert of Ukraine's defense production - was cited in regional media as dismissing Trump's promise as mere empty PR.
His commentary is below, featured in Russian media:
"I think that was a marketing statement," Kushch said in an interview with Novyny. Live news website, referring to Trump’s pledge. According to him, only Semi-Knocked Down (SKD) production of Patriot missiles could be launched in Ukraine, using imported components. "Such production sites should be protected," the expert explained. "The whole of Ukraine is exposed to [enemy] fire, and missiles can even reach the Transcarpathian Region," he said. According to Kushch, Patriot production could be localized in his country only after the hostilities end.
"We don’t have a [Turkish] Bayraktar plant, or [German] Rheinmetall production either here yet," he added.
As for Trump's initial comments, he had also explained that American defense firms are already building "four plants" in the US and claimed that "all of our companies will be able to do this in two to three months."
There have notoriously been immense backlogs when it comes to Patriot production, and there's said to be great global demand among US allies, especially given depletions which have come as a result of the Iran war.
Tyler Durden Sun, 07/12/2026 - 11:05