Mexico, Hong Kong, United States discussed on Dana Loesch
Subscribe on I two and get full episodes to liberate right to your phone. Yes, a mixture you do. Sign up for it. Oh my goodness, with everything going on in the world. And especially with the no one now we don't have tariffs that are I it was a good. I think it was a good way to leverage that to leverage the threat of that against Mexico, so we can get some sort of cooperation from them with regards to the border, and the flood of people who it seems almost it almost seems as though Mexico's assisting them with its action. I don't think that that's in any way wrong to say. Now, the president is looking to get and he says that he has the promise of it more prevention from them on this. They were discussing something to the effect of getting their national guard, which apparently still being organized, but it's a step to to go to the border and prevent this stop it from happening at the rate that it's happening for more on this, and what other stuff Steven Yates is a foreign policy expert. He's been. Traveling extensively where in the world is not Carmen sandiego, but Steven Yates, he's with the international advisory. He served in the Bush administration, advising former VP Dick Cheney, and he, I believe, is back in DC, and he joins us by phone. Stephen, always a pleasure. How are you? Areas. Do we got to Stephen? I am in charge here from DC. Yeah. Excellent. Well, we're glad you've been everywhere. We were talking about how it's like we're in the world is Carmen sandiego. But with Steven. So I have got to get your reaction to the administration leveraging the trade for stricter immigration enforcement, Mexico, apparently was, so celebrating the deal. They had a rally in Tijuana, Mexico said, yes, we have a signed agreement they were saying that they were going to send are not really entirely organized, yet, national guard of the southern border. I'm totally fine with that is. This is this victory. Because the way that Chuck Schumer, he's been mocking it, some of the media. They're trying to really downplay it as being a nothing burger. What's the real story? As with everything seems life. We've been given this dose of reality check supposedly for weeks and weeks about how things will never ever work, and it's terrible in the world's gonna fall apart because the president's Troy a different approach. And then once again, we have an outcome that no other president has been able to achieve over a much longer period of time. And I can't say that there's any particular magic ingredient about the Trump approach to this, except he's willing to say publicly in bluntly, what needs to be done in from time to time willing to put a little stick behind it to go. Our negotiating Portland's alone in frankly, I think anyone that has looked at what's been happening inside of Mexico with all of this. You got to believe at some level, the Mexican people aren't buying the political, correct garbage anymore. The thing this is this is trashing our own country, and they've got to be demanding a little better service from their own government as well. But. Really while? No expert inside the beltway would have predicted this kind of outcome or advise this kind of an approach, if this deal holds it's actually a store at right through in US, Mexico relations with regard to immigration. I think so too, and Chuck Schumer, he tweeted, right when it was, this was the other disa- Saturday. Right. Is it was announced he says, just as I predicted? I mean he literally tweeted us President Donald Trump backed off on his threat of tariffs against Mexico, Mexico. He says Mexico is going to take action to greatly reduce or eliminate illegal immigration. He wasn't taking it seriously. But do I don't know if I see anything to suggest that they are not being genuine in their promise? I mean, they, they have a signed agreement now which is much more than our previous administration was able to pretty much get with any other foreign entity in terms of reducing threats to the United States. But do you do you take them genuinely do take them at there? Mexico's leadership at their word that they are going to do something to assist in, preventing this deluge from hitting our border. Well, obviously, the challenge, I think, is worthy of adult attention, and engaged it, unfortunately, it's very, very easy for Democrats to just sit back and fire potshots sidelines is very good to be a democrat. You couldn't be extraordinarily flexible about the truth and evidence. You just say what you want to be given week. And that's what the Senate leader has been doing on this, and almost every other foreign policy topic, but this is something that I had a huge number of voters, take very, very seriously, we wouldn't have a President Donald Trump. Is that wasn't the case? And so frankly, I'm all in favor of the democrat, dismissing minimizing this if it will just please keep doing it. Very publicly throughout the rest of this election cycle. Maybe we can get the Senate back in Republican control. Yeah. Mexico said that in this was the way to put this to listeners. So doesn't sound too in the weeds. They were wanting to adopt. What what's called the safe third country protocol? So if you're Sopher instance, of people for those out there, because I know Stephen knows this for, for people coming in from say, Guatemala, or anywhere else if they if they have to pass through Mexico before they get to the United States seeking asylum. They would have to first apply in the safe country in which they crossed into an apparently Mexico was insisting the president Andre Manuel over door were saying that he was never going to agree to it. But apparently, now, they're like, okay, we, we will totally discuss the safe third country agreement with the United States because that was the one big thing, apparently that had been missing previously from the agreement talk a little about this in terms of how this has been cited it was always it always used as a talking point by the. CNN types MSNBC types by a lot of democrat elected officials saying we have to accept these people if they're seeking asylum, but they go through a number of safe countries before they even get to the United States. So doesn't it seem to undermine that whole argument? Rose leave it to these liberals and progressives to denigrate the Mexican people and their and their government to try to put them in the position of saying, we are actual sovereigns we don't have orders, and we're not safe. And so these people who are fleeing supposed terrible Russian, some of them are leaving horrible circumstances that the Mexican people are not loving and self respectful enough to be able to take care of their own borders, their own country. Maybe take care of some of these people, but it's extraordinarily important to move some of this pressure away from the border itself. We have challenges of the border, that are real that need priority attention. The basically have welfare moms that are organized by globalist leftist trying to overwhelm us services, especially denies the services to the people who really need them. And so, by way of the pressure of tariffs, or by way of whatever the. Magic sauce was that got them to the point to take seriously. This is actually very, very important. It's good for them to, to basically. Reclaim their own sovereignty, and some degree of self respect on this issue in my view. But it pushes the drug lords in those that merchant human trafficking further away from the border, and it, just like in any military campaign. Good more distance, you are trying to deal with the enemy the better position, we will be or being able to target accurately, and maybe even feel with some of these problems and help the people that are revolt. Yeah. No, absolutely. You mentioned, the, the drug lords end the cartels. There's been a push from the administration to, to redefine them as, as a centrally terror groups. Because we have military members and national guard there at the southern border. But I know that current federal law prohibits them from detaining or essentially, getting involved in enforcing immigration law. So they were painting offense. And that was, of course really mocked by a lot of by legacy media. But it's because they're barred is I understand it by federal law. Some in the administration have suggested. Well, let's redefine, how we view the cartels. Look at them as terror groups so that they can engage is that is that a wise move to do, so would that help us more effectively deal with the problem and down there, because I know that they control pretty much a huge sector of the border, and that no one crosses the border without them. Knowing is that the best way to deal with it. Well, I'm not sure I think that we've had a number of different approaches that failed so I'm sympathetic evo-. You want to try something different at the same time. I'm not a fan of trying to shoehorn different kinds of threats into the same cookie cutter shape in a lot of people have very clear impressions of what is a terrorist, although it's actually harder to define one might think, I yeah, there's definitely elements of what these drug lords gangs thugs do in our country, and in other countries that seem terrorist, like, but I think that we should just be wonderful lawmakers might get their heads together and adds some categories and some tools to those who are trying to keep us safe so they can do what they need to do instead of trying to stretch the definition of terrorists feet to fit everything needs to be done. No. Absolutely one last thing before I let you go, because I know that, that you, visit Hong Kong, and I know that you have a lots of stuff because you travel extensively and, you know, so much about this. I mean, it's, it's been covered by I see it's covered by international media, but it's not really being discussed here in the United States so much, and I don't think that people understand the significance of it. They had a huge protest over the weekend over. I think they said over a million people marching in Hong Kong over Chinese extradition law. Because China Beijing was trying to say, well, if there's, they don't want Hong Kong to become like, the, the Star Wars Cantina essentially for criminals, and they can escape over there. And we have no way to get our hands on them. And people in Hong Kong say, that's just the way for Beijing. To try to control us sand. They have very specious justifications for going after individuals. They could go after innocent people, and some have said that this is. The last the really the last stand for Hong Kong to be more independent from China, how put this in layman's terms because it hasn't really been discussed a lot. But this is huge Hong Kong is very, obviously not as controlled by as the rest of the mainland. And they have a very different relationship. But is it really is that an exaggeration to say that this is kind of the last stand for them in terms of having their own independence from Beijing? I think it's very, very close to that last straw, and for people to understand what means in nineteen Ninety-seven, Hong Kong was transferred from British sovereignty to Chinese sovereignty, under the People's Republic China, and they put forward a promise of one country, two systems, which is what would it mean is it Hong Kong supposed to continue to operate in a separate system capitalist market economy? It was supposed to basically continue as it was just changed flags and some window-dressing in what you're seeing in the streets. Now is, is proof positive that Beijing can't keep its word. And that's very, very relevant to a time when we're trying to make other deals with China with regard to trade and North Korea and other areas if they can't keep his word with its own citizens. Why would we think that they would treat foreigners any better? And when you say big, there are big protests, and there are joined normal. Protests. And I think that's the diplomatic counting word for this one in six of the entire population than when they say one in every seven people were out in the streets is something like that. In more just stink anything in American history that could have ever happened. That would have got one sixth of the population to rise up. I think you would qualify that if they dead serious issue. And so, that's, that's how the people on congress seeing this, and these are not people that are easily agitated out into the streets. These are people who are very good about going about their business, working markets, very internationalized in many ways. This only happens when there's something really fundamentally wrong. And it's, it's a it's a clear canary in the coal mine, when it comes to the entire Chinese experience other the communist party. So I do hope people big into it and get more familiar. That's a really good point that you made if they can't even keep their promise to their own citizens. How in the world can we expect them to keep any sort of promise to any foreign entities? Steven Yates, we're so glad to have you back this weekend, even traveling. Thank you so much for giving us some of your time, and I have a great rest of your week, my friend. During the take care, of course you to. We have two Dane stupidity. Still on the way. You don't wanna miss that as well. Yeah, you should go see the pictures by the way of the big March in Hong Kong. That's insane. It is insane. But I think that's a really good point that he made as we are as Trump is now trying to kind of leverage the same thing. Well, use the same formula in terms of trade with China..