Friday, June 13, 2025
Trump Admin Reportedly Pressuring Mexico To Prosecute, Extradite Politicians Suspected Of Cartel Ties
The Trump administration is reportedly pressuring Mexico to ramp up the prosecution and extradition of local politicians suspected of having ties with cartels if they have to answer to criminal charges there.
Concretely, Reuters detailed that the State Department brought up the issue at least three times in bilateral meetings. Officials called for action against politicians from the party led by President Claudia Sheinbaum, Morena, and threatened with imposing additional tariffs should their demands not be met.
The outlet quoted sources saying that five Morena officials and a former senator were mentioned, including Baja California Governor Marina del Pilar Avila
Avila and her husband, a former congressman, recently had their U.S. visas revoked. Ávila, a member of Morena, did not indicate a specific reason for the U.S. decision but characterized the situation as part of a "complex binational context" requiring "composure and prudence."
Mexico's Foreign Ministry rejected the report in a social media post, claiming that it is "absolutely false that in the meetings with Secretary Rubio or his team at the State Department, that requests have been made to investigate, prosecute or extradite any Mexican official."
However, recent reports noted ties between certain Mexican politicians and cartels. One of them is José Ascensión Murguía Santiago, former mayor of Teuchitlán, Jalisco, who was arrested following an investigation that uncovered an alleged network of criminal ties between officials of the rural Jalisco community and the Cártel Jalisco Nueva Generación (CJNG).
Murguía is now being accused of working directly with cartel leaders in operations involving kidnappings and the disposal of human remains at the Izaguirre Ranch — an infamous property allegedly used by the CJNG as a training camp, detention center and execution site.
The country's most emblematic case is that of former Mexican Secretary of Public Security Genaro García Luna, who was sentenced to pay over $2.4 billion in damages for their involvement in a vast corruption and money laundering scheme that siphoned hundreds of millions of dollars from the Mexican government.
In a related criminal case, García Luna was convicted in February 2023 by a U.S. federal jury in Brooklyn on charges of engaging in a continuing criminal enterprise, international cocaine distribution conspiracy, and making false statements. He was sentenced in October 2024 to 38 years in federal prison and fined $2 million for accepting millions of dollars in bribes from the Sinaloa Cartel, facilitating the transportation of over a million kilograms of cocaine into the United States.
García Luna remains the highest-ranking Mexican official to ever be convicted in the United States. Judge Brian M. Cogan, who presided over the trial, told García Luna that "Aside from your pleasant demeanor and your articulateness, you have the same thuggishness as El Chapo."
https://www.latintimes.com/trump-admin-reportedly-pressuring-mexico-prosecute-extradite-politicians-suspected-cartel-ties-584859
Florida State's Novel Civics Program
by Mike Sabo via RealClearEducation,
“Liberty is the lifeblood of America, but it flourishes only when citizens understand the ideas that sustain it,” says Ryan Owens, the director of the Institute for Governance and Civics at Florida State University.
The problem according to Owens is that the serious study of civics has been neglected in recent years. He relates the story of a business leader who recently told him that his biggest personnel problem is younger workers fighting over partisan politics. This is borne out by a recent survey IGC conducted, which is part of its distinctive foundation in social science. It discovered some alarming results.
The survey found that nearly 45% of young adults “would not want someone of the opposite political party to marry into their family.” A quarter said they would refuse to socialize with someone from across the aisle. Sizable percentages of both Democrats and Republicans “would refuse to sell goods to opposite partisans.”
Pointing to these findings, Owens argues that the “next generation needs to understand more about how American institutions operate, the citizen’s role in those institutions and the marketplace, and how to interact with others who hold different views.
Enter the Institute for Governance and Civics. Building a culture that prizes a rigorous study of civics and social science, paired with inculcating the virtues of civil society, is at the heart of the Center’s mission.
Established through legislation in 2023, Owens says that the IGC “seeks to become the nation’s premier policy institute for cultivating effective citizens and responsible leaders.” A faculty partner of the Jack Miller Center, which Owens calls a “force multiplier for civic reform,” the ICG aims to advance “constitutional liberty, economic liberty, conscience liberty, and educational liberty through bold research and transformative teaching.”
“The Institute for Governance and Civics is both a policy institute and a civic thought institute,” Owens notes. “We seek to produce students who understand civic thought and also have the social science skills to compete effectively in a marketplace that demands them. To create the next generation of effective citizens and responsible leaders, students must understand civic thought and social science skills.”
In addition to directing IGC, Owens is a professor of political science and an affiliate faculty member in the FSU College of Law. He calls himself an empirical legal scholar who looks to “apply statistical modeling to answer important normative questions.” His own work focuses on the U.S. Supreme Court, federal appellate courts, and judicial behavior. His recent book “Cognitive Aging and the Federal Circuit Courts” won the 2025 C. Herman Pritchett Award for the best book on law and courts written by a political scientist.
The IGC’s focus is on constitutional liberty, economic liberty, conscience liberty, and educational liberty. “We promote rigorous scholarship and teaching on the architecture of American government and the rationale for liberty,” Owens reports. “We conduct data-driven research to inform policy discussions. And we strengthen the fabric of our civic life by inviting intellectually diverse perspectives—fostering dialogue where others fear discussion.”
The IGC’s “dynamic agenda to encourage civic education” includes an undergraduate degree program in Civics and Liberty Studies, where students will supplement classes on civic thought with courses in social science.
The Institute also features a First Amendment Law Clinic in the College of Law. There, students will litigate First Amendment cases pro bono and will learn the ins and outs of how these cases wind their way through the judiciary.
Awards and scholarships are available to students as well. In 2025, FSU students read and analyzed the main points of Yuval Levin’s newest book, “American Covenant: How the Constitution Unified Our Nation – and Could Again.” The IGC gave three scholarships to students who wrote the best papers and three additional scholarships to students who exhibited public leadership.
Owens notes that showcasing “intellectually diverse perspectives on campus” and modeling “respectful dialogue” is of paramount concern. The IGC has hosted North Korean defector Yeonmi Park, who shared her harrowing escape from tyranny and human trafficking and emphasized the crucial importance of the rule of law. Jess Bravin of the Wall Street Journal and Mollie Hemingway of The Federalist engaged in a fruitful discussion about the Supreme Court. Owens says that these and other events have had a very good turnout, drawing hundreds of students.
Amidst a focus on civics education in the states, Owens wants to have the IGC “become the hub of the wheel for data related to civics and K-12 reform.” As he notes, “States across the country are taking bold steps through civics reforms to address” the lack of civic knowledge among students. The Institute is currently conducting polls to identify the state of civic knowledge in America. Owens says that the IGC plans on making this information available so it can inform broader policy discussions. Plans are also in place to host a treasure trove of data for researchers looking to examine K-12 education and civics more broadly.
Even though it was recently founded, the Institute for Governance and Civics is already making a notable impact in the important mission of reforming civic education across the nation.
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/florida-states-novel-civics-program
Two Former USPS Employees Indicted For Stealing $80 Million In Treasury Checks
Missing your tax return check and living near Philadelphia? We might have an idea of what's gone wrong...
That's because two former employees of the U.S. Postal Service in Philadelphia have been indicted for their roles in a scheme involving the theft of over $80 million in U.S. Treasury checks, the Department of Justice announced Wednesday.
According to federal prosecutors, Tauheed Tucker, 23, and Saahir Irby, 27, both previously employed as mail processing clerks at the USPS Philadelphia Processing and Distribution Center, are accused of stealing thousands of envelopes containing Treasury checks, according to NBC Philadelphia.
The indictment further alleges that Tucker and Irby sold the stolen checks to two other individuals—Cory Scott, 25, of Ardmore, and Alexander Telewoda, 25, of Clifton Heights. Scott and Telewoda are said to have advertised the checks for sale via the messaging app Telegram.
NBC Philadelphia writes that once payments were received from interested buyers, Scott and Telewoda allegedly mailed the checks out. According to prosecutors, those buyers then attempted to cash the checks, unaware they had been stolen.
Officials report that while the total face value of the stolen checks exceeded $80 million, approximately $11 million worth were successfully negotiated at banks by the buyers.
All four men—Tucker, Irby, Scott, and Telewoda—face charges including conspiracy to steal government funds, theft of government property, and mail theft. Each could face up to 20 years in prison if convicted.
In addition, Irby is facing separate charges of mail theft in connection with another incident involving stolen Treasury checks
Planned Parenthood Under Investigation From DOGE Panel for Misusing Taxpayer Dollars
A congressional panel led by Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene has launched an investigation into Planned Parenthood, probing whether the nation’s largest abortion business has misused federal taxpayer funds.
The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) Subcommittee, chaired by Greene under the House Oversight Committee, initiated the probe on Friday, targeting Planned Parenthood’s handling of billions in federal dollars. Greene sent a letter to Planned Parenthood CEO Alexis McGill Johnson, questioning whether the nonprofit is commingling federal funds for unpermitted purposes, despite the Hyde Amendment’s prohibition on using federal money for abortions.
“Planned Parenthood has received billions in taxpayer dollars while offering almost no prenatal care and pushing late-term abortions,” Greene said in a statement. “The American people deserve to know if their money is being used to fund grotesque experiments or ideological agendas.”
The investigation comes amid renewed scrutiny of Planned Parenthood’s finances.
According to a 2023 Government Accountability Office report, the organization and its affiliates received $1.78 billion in federal and state funds from 2019 to 2021, including $90.14 million in forgivable Paycheck Protection Program loans meant for small businesses struggling during the COVID-19 pandemic. Pro-life critics, including Rep. Chris Smith, R-N.J., argue these funds were misallocated, as Planned Parenthood, with over 16,000 employees, did not qualify as a small business.
Planned Parenthood’s 2022-2023 annual report revealed the organization performed a record 402,237 abortions, a 5% increase from the previous year, while its net assets grew to over $2.5 billion.
Pro-life groups have accused Planned Parenthood of prioritizing abortion over other health services, noting a 71% drop in cancer screenings and an 80% decline in prenatal services since 2010. They say taxpayers should not be forced to subsidize an organization that kills over 1,000 unborn babies every day.”
The DOGE probe also questions Planned Parenthood’s mutilating kids with trans hormones, including hormone therapy at 45 affiliate health centers, which Greene alleges may obscure the true extent of such procedures under vague reporting categories like “other procedures.” Pro-life advocates argue that these services, alongside abortions, divert resources from genuine women’s healthcare needs.
The investigation has reignited calls to defund Planned Parenthood, a priority for pro-life lawmakers and activists. Redirecting these funds to the 14,000 community health centers that outnumber Planned Parenthood facilities 20 to 1 would better serve women and protect unborn lives.
Trump says Nippon-US Steel deal has resolvable national security risk
Nippon Steel’s $14.9 billion bid for U.S. Steel poses a national security risk, but those concerns can be mitigated if the companies fulfill certain conditions laid out by the Trump administration, U.S. President Donald Trump said in a executive order on Friday.
"I additionally find that the threatened impairment to the national security of the United States arising as a result of the Proposed Transaction (JO:NTUJ) can be adequately mitigated if the conditions set forth in section 3 of this order are met," Trump said in the order released by the White House.
Re: Iran — Sounds crazy but it’s true
Democrats trust Iran with nukes more than they trust you, their fellow Americans, with guns.
That’s not hyperbole. That’s not theoretical. That’s factually true. By their actions, their policy, their votes, we shall know them, and they voted for Obama’s Iran deal while at the same time, Obama’s Attorney General Eric Holder was doing everything possible — the sneakier and the slimier the better — to keep guns out of the hands of law-abiding Americans, or intentionally arming criminals. (See: Operation Chokepoint, Fast and Furious, etc.)
All honest observers at the time knew Obama’s precious 2015 Iran Deal was a ten year glide path to nukes not a proscription from them — and here we are, ten years later, in 2025, and America’s chess pieces were, this week, being shifted around in the region in anticipation of… something. Late last night, we found out what: Israel would carry out targeted strikes on Iranian leadership.
Right on time.
Embassies and other American operations present in the region were either placed on high alert or emptied out. We don’t know much more than that, as regards our response, in kinetic terms, either in the short or long term, but we do know that President Trump spent a night at Camp David — which he hates — last Sunday night. (It’s too “rustic” for our gilded Commander-in-Chief, lol.) He had extremely private meetings with his very, very closest advisors, chief among them Marco Rubio, who is wearing so many hats now I’ve lost count. (Secretary of State, National Security Advisor, etc.)
Now, bearing all this in mind, read Eric Holder’s X post from late last week, Friday the 6th of June. He’s not a heavy user of X, so when he does post, it’s notable.
The word “appeasement” jumped out at me; Here, Holder’s referring to President Trump’s righteous civil rights battle with higher education to do something about the observable, inarguable tide of antisemitism rising on their campuses. Of course the left is framing it all as a “free speech” issue but these young adults, as we’ve all seen, aren’t just holding signs and marching. They’re terrorizing Jewish students, taking over and vandalizing buildings, and even taking janitors hostage!
“Appeasement” is a word we traditionally use when talking about terrorists or terrorist countries, notably Iran. “Extremists” is a word they, the Obama administration, popularized to describe anyone who disagreed with them about, well, anything.
“Enough. No policy of negotiation, appeasement or capitulation is going to work with these dishonest, morally bankrupt extremists.”
If you saw that sentence all by itself, completely out of context, you might think, reasonably, it was directed at the Iranian mullahs, not your fellow Americans. All Trump wants is for the Jew-hating to stop.
That’s it.
Just knock it off with terrorizing Jews. That’s all they gotta do. But nooooo…
It will be interesting to see what both Eric Holder and Barack Obama post about the Israeli strikes inside Iran last night. Thus far, they have been silent.
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2025/06/re_iran_sounds_crazy_but_it_s_true.html
Trump Won in that Trade Pact with China -- In More Ways Than One
President Trump and his cabinet secretaries announced that “we have a deal with China!” – and the stock market didn’t react.
Didn’t go up, didn’t go down. The first two days since the announcement, at least, the market remained flat.
In part, this is likely due to the fact that everyone’s waiting to see the final deal, though they’ve given us the big picture: both sides give in a little; the U.S. will still have high additional tariffs on Chinese goods and will allow most Chinese college students, and mainland China will stop holding critical rare earth components hostage.
The devil will be in the details, of course, but this big picture should at least have been enough for either excitement or horror from the market, and it drew neither.
What it did draw, interestingly, was a lot of editorials, implying that President Trump has backed down, or that he never really had a strategy, even though the net end result has a much higher tariff total on Chinese goods than the tariff level in place when he entered office. So, from the President’s tariff strategy at least, it’s a win.
But there’s more to it than this. This entire experiment has been a lesson, to both the American people and the entire world, and more and more people are beginning to absorb this crucial lesson, at long last.
First, some background: All imported products have import duties, around five percent or so, give or take, which are the same for goods from almost all countries on earth. On top of those basic U.S. import duties, some products from some countries have some additional tariffs, such as the 7.5% additional and 25% additional that were added to most Chinese products during President Trump’s first term.
This year, for Chinese goods alone, President Trump added first ten percent, then twenty, then even more, until the new tariffs totaled 145% on top of the normal duty and the old 7.5% and 25% additions. So, for a short while, before the current truce, America was charging between 145% and 190% on Chinese goods, depending on the product.
Now with the new deal in place, it will about 55% plus the basic duty, possibly plus the first term tariffs (these details haven’t yet been clarified).
The people who want to attack President Trump can do so, saying that he’s been talked down to a much lower tariff, compared to the massive level briefly imposed in April. But is that really what’s happened? At the end of this process, the total tariffs on Chinese goods will be much higher than they were when he started his second term. So from the perspective of setting tariffs, President Trump has definitely won. He’s raised the tariffs considerably on Chinese goods.
But that’s not the main lesson here.
President Trump’s thesis – and not just his, but the thesis of the conservative movement, the MAGA movement, the American working class, and all American patriots – is that the United States has lost far too much manufacturing over the past half century.
The United States of America was the king of the industrial revolution; our economic dominance was propelled by our ability to make everything, and to be more efficient than anyone else in doing it.
Gradually, over the generations, due to an unhealthy mix of union power, Marxism, bureaucracy, a litigation culture, high taxes, and crime, America lost our dominance, and gradually ceded the production of whole classes of products to other countries.
More and more, over the past forty years, due to China’s relentless industrial espionage and intellectual property theft, currency manipulation, subsidizing of industry, bribery of western politicians, and use of slave labor, China came to dominate this transfer of production.
Instead of the United States losing all this industry evenly to a couple dozen low-cost countries across the third world, we’ve lost almost everything to China. How can China be the best, most magnetic draw on earth, not just for textiles and toys, machines and appliances, raw materials and finished goods, but for all of the above? How indeed.
President Trump has set out to reverse this decline, to try to revive the American model.
This takes tax cuts, bureaucracy reduction, tort reform – lots of things. It’s possible, but it’s not easy, and it’s not quick. And it still requires some push, to overcome inertia, because it’s difficult and costly for any company to move production in the first place, so once it’s happened, it’s very difficult for a company to justify doing it yet again.
Here’s what we have learned from President Trump’s tariff experiments, in both the first term and the second:
· Our normal low import duties are not enough to discourage companies from importing from China.
· The new additional tariffs (Section 301) of 7.5% or 25% that he implemented in 2018 and 2019 encouraged a lot of companies to start finding other vendors outside China – both in other low-cost countries and here at home in the USA – but of course nowhere near enough.
· The new additional fentanyl tariffs of 20% in February and March of this year encouraged a lot more companies to start moving away from China, but again, not nearly enough.
· The next 125% in additional tariffs in April, on top of everything else, brought importing almost to a stop.
So now we will settle on some lower number that won’t stop all trade, but which will be enough to get most American companies to look seriously at moving their supply base outside China.
What we learned from this experiment is that 5% wasn’t enough, 30% wasn’t enough, even 60% wasn’t enough to get American businesses to take the issue seriously, but 150% to 180% certainly is. So we will now look forward to a period in which the tariff on Chinese goods will be something like forty or fifty points higher than the tariff on the goods of any other country.
The president is pursuing a combination strategy: much higher tariffs on Chinese goods to encourage American businesses to look for new sources outside China, and lower taxes and much less regulation here, to enable American suppliers to at least compete for some of that business.
Nobody expects 100% of the business taken away from China to come back to the United States. But twenty percent? Thirty percent? Maybe even forty percent? That would be wonderful for the American economy.
And it will be wonderful too, for all of our other allies whom China has been smothering over the years with their corrupt trade practices: Taiwan and the Philippines, South Korea and Costa Rica, and so many more -- there are lots of other low-cost countries who have been frozen out of participation in global manufacturing growth, due to China’s countless violations of international law and fair trade policy.
Perhaps most important of all, this process has pulled off the tarp that had hidden how terrible our dependence on China is, for so many years. Now we all realize how unforgivably dependent the American manufacturing sector has allowed itself to become, on the world’s biggest rogue nation.
We have long known that we bought too much from China, but only in the last few years, and especially the last few months, have we realized how bad it really is.
One day, China will attack Taiwan or the Philippines and start the war of all wars in Asia. We all know it’s going to happen; we just don’t know when. But once it does, we know that we will be unable to get anything at all – components, subassemblies, or finished goods -- from China, for years and years, no matter how desperately we need it.
To the extent that the American economy survives that future period, we will all owe President Trump all the credit -- for fighting so hard, for so long, to inoculate these vulnerable United States against that fateful day.
John F. Di Leo is a Chicagoland-based international transportation manager, trade compliance trainer, and speaker. Read his book on the surprisingly numerous varieties of vote fraud (The Tales of Little Pavel), his political satires on the Biden-Harris years (Evening Soup with Basement Joe, Volumes I, II, and III), and his most recent collection of public policy essays, Current Events and the Issues of Our Age, all available in eBook or paperback, only on Amazon.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)