If you have a violent community in your state, it should establish a CompStat commission to explore what works and apply it relentlessly until neighborhoods become safe.
Conservative states have used the right kind of criminal justice reform to reduce crime, reduce the number of prisoners, increase safety, and reduce costs for the taxpayer. When governors and former governors like Rick Perry of Texas, Nathan Deal of Georgia, and Nikki Haley of South Carolina can all point to less crime, more former prisoners transitioning to jobs and citizenship—and lower costs with fewer prisons—something profound is happening.
President Trump knows there are proven steps to build safer communities, and he knows it is a moral imperative to use those proven steps to save the lives of the poorest among us.
SECURING THE BORDER
President Trump has already taken the first steps toward fixing our immigration system by strengthening security at our borders. During his first week in office, President Trump signed executive orders to hire up to ten thousand more US Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers and up to five thousand more US Border Patrol agents.
This was a perfectly reasonable action to take—and long overdue. Heroin and opioid abuse are devastating communities across the nation. The Drug Enforcement Administration told Reuters in July 2013 that large-scale opium poppy farms, the plant from which heroin is made, are “very rare” in the United States, so most of the heroin is coming from outside our borders.6
It turns out, the same agency said two years later in its National Drug Threat Assessment of 2015 that most drugs, including heroin, in the United States are indeed sourced from Mexico. This includes traditional drugs that have been abused for years, such as cocaine, heroin, and marijuana. But the DEA reported Mexico is also the primary source of new drugs that have been wreaking havoc on a new generation of Americans, including fentanyl, a synthetic opioid that’s one hundred times stronger than heroin, and methamphetamine, which has ravaged entire communities in Appalachia and elsewhere.
Democrats would like people to believe that Republican efforts to secure the border are some xenophobic attempt to halt all immigration. But that’s just not the case. We are trying to stop dangerous people from bringing dangerous substances that destroy our families and communities into our country. Violent drug cartels that operate throughout South America and Mexico are principally responsible for the supply side of the US drug trade.
According to the DEA’s report:
The most significant drug trafficking organizations operating in the United States today are the dangerous and highly sophisticated Mexican transnational criminal organizations (TCOs) that continue to be the principal suppliers of cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine, and marijuana. These organizations are responsible for the extreme violence seen in Mexico, as these groups battle for turf and attack public officials and innocent civilians. Domestically, affiliated and violent gangs are increasingly a threat to the safety and security of our communities. They profit primarily by putting drugs on the street and have become crucial to the Mexican cartels.
President Trump signed a trio of executive orders on February 9 instructing his administration to find ways to help local and state police stop “the illegal smuggling and trafficking of humans, drugs or other substances, wildlife, and weapons”; “comprehensively address illegal immigration, drug trafficking, and violent crime”; and to look for ways to better protect police and increase penalties for crimes committed against officers.
Drug-dealing thugs are not our only problem. Radical Islamic terrorists know how permeable our borders are. At a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing in 2005, the former CIA chief Porter Goss said “it may be only a matter of time” before terrorist cells attempt to use weapons of mass destruction within the United States. Any chemical, biological, or nuclear weapon brought into the United States by a terrorist cell would not likely be flown in on a commercial airliner. The United States has spent billions securing airports across the country. Any weapon would come in on a ship at one of our ports, or in the back of a truck that is waived through at a border checkpoint. All the money we have spent to make our airports safe is wasted if we don’t enforce our borders on land and sea. Goss’s testimony alone should be enough reason to fully secure our border and get serious about closely controlling immigration.
President Trump’s next step toward securing the border came in his budget proposal released in March. The president called for $1.5 billion in supplemental funding in this fiscal year to start construction on the border wall with Mexico. He’s asking for an additional $2.6 billion for the wall’s funding in the 2018 budget. He is also proposing roughly $400 million for border security technology and almost $300 million for Customs and Border Protection operations. Add to that the approximately $1.2 billion he requested to help Immigrations and Customs Enforcement successfully detain and deport illegal immigrants who commit other crimes.
The Left downplayed President Trump’s budget proposal as little more than messaging, since Congress ultimately controls the government’s purse strings. But the message itself—that the United States was going to take border security seriously—already seems to be helping reduce illegal immigration. The Los Angeles Times reported on March 9 that the number of immigrants attempting to illegally cross the border has been reduced by 40 percent since President Trump took office.7
Citing US Customs and Border Patrol figures, the newspaper reported illegal entry attempts at the border and in ports dropped from about 1,370 per day in January to about 840 people a day in February. This was remarkable, because “Border Patrol agents typically see a 10 percent to 20 percent surge of people making the journey in February,” the paper reported.
President Trump should continue to send his strong-border message and continue efforts to tightly control the border. Until we have total control over who enters our country, we will never have an immigration system that benefits the United States.
Meanwhile, the Left will fight tooth and nail to reduce spending on border security, but I urge you to pay close attention to what President Trump achieves with the funds he is allotted. Previous estimates by the federal government have claimed the border wall could cost up to $22 billion. With Trump’s experience building large structures effectively and efficiently, I predict the cost will be dramatically less than that amount.
STOPPING OUTLAW CITIES
Strengthened border enforcement will help stop drug cartels, terrorists, and other illegal immigrants from entering the country. But if so-called sanctuary cities—which should be called outlaw cities—continue to refuse to turn illegal and undocumented immigrants in their jails over to federal authorities, our immigration system will never properly function and our communities will not be truly safe.
According to the 2015 DEA report, we could greatly weaken these drug cartels by deporting those who are in their US networks.
“The foundation of Mexican TCO [transnational criminal organization] operations in the United States is comprised of extended family and friends. Families affiliated with various Mexican TCOs in Mexico vouch for US-based relatives or friends that are deemed trustworthy enough to help run various aspects of the drug trafficking operations in the United States. Actual members of Mexican TCOs are usually sent to important US hub cities to manage stash houses containing drug shipments and bulk cash drug proceeds,” the DEA reported.
President Trump has already moved the country in the right direction on this front as well. Just days after his inauguration, President Trump wrote an executive order declaring local governments that “willfully violate federal law in an attempt to shield aliens from removal from the United States” will “not receive federal funds, except as mandated by law.”
That included cities such as Chicago and Los Angeles, where instead of immediately turning immigrants in police custody over to federal agents, the noncitizen criminals are released back out on the streets.
The Left immediately went bonkers, sowing fear of
mass deportations throughout immigrant communities, and claiming crime would spike because immigrants in the country illegally who were victims of crime would be afraid to call police. But Trump’s order was very clear about who he was going after. According to the order, that group included “illegal immigrants who:
“have been convicted of any criminal offense;
“have been charged with any criminal offense, where such charge has not been resolved;
“have committed acts that constitute a chargeable criminal offense;
“have engaged in fraud or willful misrepresentation in connection with any official matter or application before a governmental agency;
“have abused any program related to receipt of public benefits;
“are subject to a final order of removal, but who have not complied with their legal obligation to depart the United States; or
“in the judgment of an immigration officer, otherwise pose a risk to public safety or national security.”
How could any reasonable person argue against swiftly deporting any noncitizen who comes to the United States and commits a crime, misrepresents him- or herself to our government, or poses a risk to national security?
One important group President Trump did not include in his enforcement agenda is the group of immigrants who have registered through the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program. The president has repeatedly said he wants to deal with those who were brought to the country as children, and their parents, with compassion.
Some municipalities that had not been enforcing immigration laws corrected their policies once President Trump came into office. Miami-Dade mayor Carlos Gimenez told local jails to cooperate with federal immigration authorities the day after President Trump signed his executive order to deny federal funding to outlaw cities.
But others, such as San Francisco, Boston, New York, and Chicago have opted to ignore the order and continue ignoring federal immigration law.
San Francisco has challenged the president’s order in court, over protest from its residents.
The website Immigrationreform.com reported:
San Francisco, which has defiantly maintained its sanctuary policies despite public outcry after the fatal shooting of Kate Steinle by an illegal alien, stands to lose millions of dollars in funding. San Francisco receives as much as $1.2 billion in federal funds currently. Kate Steinle’s murder has motivated lawmakers around the country to introduce legislation to eliminate sanctuary policies. This year, at least 25 state legislatures are considering measures to prohibit sanctuary policies in their states and require law enforcement to cooperate with federal immigration officials.
Ultimately, the leaders of cities that continue to defy federal law and grant asylum to criminal immigrants must answer to their voters and will have to explain why the imagined rights of criminal noncitizens are more important than federal funding to build infrastructure, hospitals, or schools. Mayor Rahm Emanuel will have a tough time telling the families of the four thousand people shot last year in Chicago why the community needs more criminals.
Liberals have also fought two attempts by the president to temporarily ban travelers from several Middle Eastern countries that Obama administration officials said lacked adequate security screening capabilities. Liberal judges in Seattle and Hawaii have acquiesced and halted two executive orders that President Trump signed to temporarily bar travel to allow security to be improved.
No doubt, the Left will continue to oppose efforts to create a legal, safe, controlled immigration system, just as it has fought efforts to combat voter fraud. I’m convinced these two issues are related for the Left. President Trump is working to ensure that only living, legal citizens can vote in this country—reasonable criteria to most Americans which pose real problems for the Left.
SAFETY ABROAD
President Trump will find it much easier to make America safe at home if he also focuses on safety abroad. The president must restore America’s reputation around the world by rekindling relations with our traditional allies—and by reasserting our strength to potential enemies. He also must revive the strength of the military by restoring defense funding and immediately changing the Obama-era rules of engagement so that our servicemen and -women can fully defend themselves and complete their missions while in harm’s way. Once he begins these first tasks, seeking out and eradicating radical Islamic terrorism will be made much easier.
RESTORING AMERICA’S REPUTATION
President Trump has already begun the process of strengthening our ties with the United Kingdom and Israel—two of our strongest allies.
British prime minister Theresa May was the first foreign leader to meet with President Trump after his inauguration. While the two are very different people, they had an excellent visit. May said in February she looked forward to hosting President Trump in Britain later this year.
The United States–United Kingdom partnership is uniquely important now, since both countries stand to benefit from a future bilateral trade deal once Britain officially exits the European Union.
President Trump also had a positive early meeting with Canadian prime minister Justin Trudeau, who perhaps could play a role in making America’s deal with Britain a trilateral deal with our northern neighbor. As I mentioned earlier, the Canada–United States part of the North American Free Trade Agreement has been an effective, mutually beneficial arrangement.
One critical relationship President Trump immediately started nurturing is our alliance with Israel. After meeting with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in February 2017, Trump pledged to put his deal-making skills to use and help negotiate meaningful peace between Israel and Palestine. This is important, because the president plans to reach out to other Arab neighbors of Israel to help in the negotiations. This is an incredibly adroit move from a president the elite love to label as a foreign relations novice.
And while liberals and the media wince at President Trump’s forceful stance on foreign issues, American allies in other parts of the world value the strength he is projecting and his willingness to listen. Benny Johnson with the Independent Journal Review wrote in March 2017 about a dinner he shared with the Afghan ambassador to the United States.8
The ambassador, Dr. Hamdullah Mohib, hosted a dinner for Gold Star Wives—the spouses of American soldiers who had died in combat fighting in Afghanistan. During the dinner, he took questions from the dozen Gold Star Wives and other military members he invited. According to Johnson, Dr. Mohib “stunned those listening” when he answered a question about how the Afghan people viewed President Trump.
This is the ambassador’s response, according to Johnson:
I’ve personally met with President Trump at Mar-a-Lago and the president has had two phone conversations with President [Ashraf] Ghani [of Afghanistan]. One call was after he won the election and one after [Trump] became president. Before the calls, we were advised to keep conversations short because, we were told, Trump will not be interested in the details of the call and does not have a long attention span, so it would be pointless to have a long call.
However, we were pleasantly surprised at how much time President Trump spent asking very informed questions. The first time the presidents spoke, the questions Trump asked impressed us. “How can you win in this fight [against terrorism]?” he asked. “What do you need to become financially independent?” and “How can American business invest in Afghanistan? How can we develop businesses and mining in your country?”
Trump would listen intently after each question, often asking follow-ups. Trump’s second call with our president was even longer than the first. Asking these types of questions for our country is something the Obama administration never did. The Obama administration was the most academic administration we have ever had to deal with but the Trump administration has been the most thoughtful and intelligent.
Trump continually asked “How can you win? What does Afghanistan need to win?” in reference to our fight with terrorism. Trum
p wants to win. Sincerely. All the Obama administration wanted to do was not lose.
The Obama administration was hesitant with us. The enemy could sense that. When the Obama administration announced its plans to pull troops out of the region, they announced the exact date they would do it. All our enemies had to do was wait [Obama] out. They knew the date they had to hang on until—which gave them the will to fight. They used that time to recruit and build up resources.
To bring real reform, we must be able to defeat enemies outside our country and inside. We must overthrow the Afghan warlords who are profiteering off the war. Every time we tried to remove one of them from power, [Secretary John] Kerry would say “no” because it would potentially make it unstable and require more troops be brought in. The entire Obama administration was too cautious, but Kerry was the most cautious. Perhaps the Obama administration was fatigued by the time we assumed power. [President Ghani assumed power in September 2014.] But Trump is very different from Obama in this way.
This is good, for the future of Afghanistan.
I included Ambassador Mohib’s full response, because it perfectly speaks to President Trump’s approach to learning that we described in chapter 2—but it also highlights the completely out-of-touch way our intellectual yet idiot international affairs experts have treated our allies for the last decade. If President Trump continues to approach foreign conflicts with a real resolve to win, our foreign allies will recognize and appreciate it, and our enemies will be deterred from bad behavior.
When all our allies respect the United States again, it will be easier to deal with countries like North Korea, which is the most dangerous place in the world. With a concerted, unified effort, Iran could be made to stop funding terrorism. Relations with Russia will be much less complex when Vladimir Putin understands there are real consequences for acting like an aggressive imperialist.
Understanding Trump Page 17