America is battling a devastating invasion at our border with Mexico, and Texas is on the front line as it makes up roughly half of that border. Unfortunately for Texas and the nation, the federal government doesnt appear all that interested in dealing with the crisis. In fact, they seem intent on facilitating it instead. To make matters worse, Mexicos President has now taken it upon himself to make ridiculous demands of our nation, exemplifying just how determined powerful government entities are to leverage this crisis for political and personal gain.
Last week, Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador revealed that if America wants his help stemming the flow of illegal immigrants crossing our border from Mexico, we would have to give $20 billion in taxpayer money to Latin American and Caribbean countries, grant 10 million work visas to Hispanics who have been working in the U.S. for at least 10 years, end American sanctions against socialist Venezuela, and halt the Cuban blockade.
How dare this man make any demands whatsoever of the United States of America. The correct response by America and Texas would be to stop all aid to Mexico and put pressure on Lopez Obrador by shutting down the PEMEX Deer Park refinery. Mexicos lucrative partnership in this high-capacity refinery has economically benefited them for decades, and shutting it down would cripple Mexicos oil supply, sending a very clear message. It wouldnt take Mexico long to realize that its in their best interest to help us protect our nation so we can help them prosper in theirs.
But just as the Biden administrations motivations in addressing the border crisis arent about American interests, Lopez Obradors motivations arent about Mexicos interests, either. He is an ideological communist who caters to the cartels, to the detriment of the Mexican people. In addition, his single six-year term is coming to a close. So, when he demands $20 billion, could his plan be to pocket some of it and pay off the cartels on his way out? Does he intend to strongarm America into providing him a nice financial windfall for his retirement?
I believe in diplomacy through strength and, if necessary, by force. But the milquetoast Biden administration has a habit of capitulating to ridiculous demands, even if our own nation suffers, rather than using what leverage we have in our own national interest.
Lopez Obrador was only elected because the people thought he was the lesser of two evils. But he has shown his true colors, and he clearly doesnt care about what is best for Mexico. The Mexican people dont want illegals there, either. Just like Americans, they want their own interests to be prioritized over political agendas being exploited for power and gain by corrupt and self-serving government officials.
There are many people who are following the legal immigration process, as many have in the past, including my own legal immigrant parents. Why would we bend to and even reward those who are blatantly breaking our laws, and why would we capitulate to the outrageous demands of someone allowing, and perhaps even facilitating, that criminality?
America once maintained peace through strength in a world where everyone knew the powerful capabilities of our nation and dared not test them. Now, our enemies and our allies seem comfortable testing the limits to see just how much America will endure before we put our foot down in defense of our national interests. The numerous domestic and global failures by the Biden Administration have only emboldened them in their demands and aggression, confident that they will not face consequences.
The United States of America is stronger than that and we need leaders with the backbone to stand up for American interests. When America is strong, the world is safer. The Mexican people, including my family who live there, cant wait to see the end of the Biden regime. If we are to secure our nation and protect the American way of life, we need representatives who recognize the reality of the illegal immigration crisis, who call it what it is, and who have the gumption to put a stop to it to protect America, her people, and her values. Otherwise, America will no longer be a land of freedom and prosperity for future generations of citizens, including industrious legal immigrants.
* * *
Irene Armendariz-Jackson is running for election to the U.S. House of Representatives for the 16th Congressional District in Texas. She will be on the ballot in the Republican primary on March 5, 2024.
The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.
The government has said the £3 cap would stay in place for another year, until December 2025.
But speaking on Sunday morning with Trevor Phillips, Transport Secretary Louise Haugh indicated the government was considering abolishing the cap beyond that point to explore alternative methods of funding.
She said: “We’ve stepped in with funding to protect it at £3 until 31 December next year. And in that period, we’ll look to establish more targeted approaches.
“We’ve, through evaluation of the £2 cap, found that the best approach is to target it at young people.
“So we want to look at ways in order to ensure more targeted ways, just like we do with the concessionary fare for older people, we think we can develop more targeted ways that will better encourage people onto buses.”
Pressed again on whether that meant the single £3 cap would be removed after December 2025, and that other bus reliefs could be put in place, she replied: “That’s what we’re considering at the moment as we go through this year, as we have that time whilst the £3 cap is in place – because the evaluation that we had showed, it hadn’t represented good value for money, the previous cap.”
Advertisement
It comes after Ms Haigh also confirmed that HS2 would not run to Crewe.
There had been reports that Labour could instead build an “HS2-light” railway between Birmingham and Crewe.
But Ms Haigh said that while HS2 would be built from Birmingham to Euston, the government was “not resurrecting the plans for HS2”.
“HS2 Limited isn’t getting any further work beyond what’s been commissioned to Euston,” she added.
Last month the prime minster confirmed the £2 bus fare cap would rise to £3 – branded the “bus tax” by critics – saying that the previous government had not planned for the funding to continue past the end of 2024.
He said that although the cap would increase to £3, it would stay at that price until the end of 2025 “because I know how important it is”.
Manchester mayor to keep £2 cap
The cap rise has been unpopular with some in Labour, with Greater Manchester mayor Andy Burnham opting to keep the £2 cap in place for the whole of 2025, despite the maximum that can be charged across England rising to £3.
The region’s mayor said he was able to cap single fares at £2 because of steps he took to regulate the system and bring buses back into public ownership from last year.
He also confirmed plans to introduce a contactless payment system, with a daily and weekly cap on prices, as Greater Manchester moves towards a London-style system for public transport pricing.
Under devolution, local authorities and metro mayors can fund their own schemes to keep fares down, as has been the case in Greater Manchester, London and West Yorkshire.
Shelves will not be left empty this winter if farmers go on strike over tax changes, a cabinet minister has said.
Louise Haigh, the transport secretary, said the government would be setting out contingency plans to ensure food security is not compromised if farmers decide to protest.
Farmers across England and Wales have expressed anger that farms will no longer get 100% relief on inheritance tax, as laid out in Rachel Reeves’s budget last month.
Welsh campaign group Enough is Enough has called for a national strike among British farmers to stop producing food until the decision to impose inheritance tax on farms is reversed, while others also contemplate industrial action.
Asked by Trevor Phillips if she was concerned at the prospect that shelves could be empty of food this winter, Ms Haigh replied: “No, we think we put forward food security really as a priority, and we’ll work with farmers and the supply chain in order to ensure that.
“The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs will be setting out plans for the winter and setting out – as business as usual – contingency plans and ensuring that food security is treated as the priority it deserves to be.”
From April 2026, farms worth more than £1m will face an inheritance tax rate of 20%, rather than the standard 40% applied to other land and property.
However, farmers – who previously did not have to pay any inheritance tax – argue the change will mean higher food prices, lower food production and having to sell off land to pay.
Tom Bradshaw, the president of the National Farmers Union, said he had “never seen the united sense of anger that there is in this industry today”.
“I don’t for one moment condone that anyone will stop supplying the supermarkets,” he said.
“We saw during the COVID crisis that those unable to get their food were often either the very most vulnerable, or those that have been working long hours in hospitals and nurses – that is something we do not want to see again.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
7:06
Farmers ‘betrayed’ over tax change
Explaining why the tax changes were so unpopular, he said food production margins were “so low”, and “any liquid cash that’s been available has been reinvested in farm businesses” for the future.
“One of the immediate changes is that farms are going to have to start putting money into their pensions, which many haven’t previously done,” he said.
“They’re going to have to have life insurance policies in case of a sudden death. And unfortunately, that was cash that would previously have been invested in producing the country’s food for the future.”
Sir Keir has staunchly defended the measure, saying it will not affect small farms and is aimed at targeting wealthy landowners who buy up farmland to avoid paying inheritance tax.
However, the Conservatives have argued the changes amount to a “war on farmers” and have begun a campaign targeting the prime minister as a “farmer harmer”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:19
‘Farmers’ livelihoods are threatened’
Speaking to Sunday Morning With Trevor Phillips, shadow home secretary Chris Philp said he was happy with farmers protesting against the budget – as long as their methods and tactics were “lawful”.
“What the Labour government has done to farmers is absolutely shocking,” he said.
“These are farmers that, you know, they’re not well off particularly, they’re often actually struggling to make ends meet because farming is not very profitable these days. And of course, we rely on farmers for our food security.
Addressing the possible protests, Mr Philp said: “I think people have a right to protest, and obviously we respect the right to protest within the law, and it’s up to parliament to set where the law sits.
“So I think providing they’re behaving lawfully, legally, then they do have a right to protest.”
Moscow is focused on the “energy infrastructure throughout Ukraine” and is trying to intimidate Ukrainians with “cold and lack of light”, Mr Zelenskyy said.
The president added: “The whole world sees and knows that we are defending ourselves against absolute evil, which does not understand any language but force.
“We need unity [and] the world needs unity. Only together can we stop this evil.”
Two people were killed and a 17-year-old boy was injured after a Russian attack in the Black Sea port of Odesa, regional governor Oleh Kiper said.
Energy infrastructure was damaged, he said, leading to “interruptions in the supply of heat, water and electricity”.
In Mykolaiv, southern Ukraine, officials said two people were killed in a Russian drone attack.
Ukraine’s state emergency service said a multi-storey building, cars and a shopping centre were hit.
Two women were killed and six injured, including two children, it added.
In the central Dnipro region, two people died and three were wounded in a strike on a rail depot, while in Lviv, on the border with Poland, a woman was killed in a car.
In the capital, Kyiv, mayor Vitali Klitschko said Russian attacks had caused a fire to erupt on the roof of a residential building, injuring at least two people.
People took refuge in metro stations, while emergency services were pictured removing part of a Russian missile from an apartment block.
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
The Ukrainian military said it had destroyed 102 missiles and 42 drones launched by Russia.
Hypersonic missiles were among the 120 fired at Ukrainian territory, it said.
Air defences were active in “almost all” regions of Ukraine.
Equipment at thermal power stations has been “seriously damaged” during Russian air strikes, Ukraine’s largest private energy provider said. DTEK said its staff were working on repairs.
Russia’s defence ministry confirmed it had attacked energy resources supporting Ukraine’s military-industrial complex, Russian news agencies reported.
Poland scrambled its air force early on Sunday because of the “massive attack by the Russian Federation using cruise missiles, ballistic missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles”.
Mr Zelenskyy sent his condolences to anyone affected by the latest Russian attacks.
He said “all necessary forces” were involved in restoring power and facilities.
On Tuesday, it will be 1,000 days since Russia launched what it calls its “special military operation”.