Today Donald Trump’S campaign released a memo saying it would force Mexico for all by threatening to cut off billions of dollars of money transfer the Mexican are sending back home.
Currently about $24 billion in remittance payments are sent to Mexico on the United States every year. Donald Trump states this provides a substantial leverage for the United States obtained from all the necessary funds to pay for that border wall.
If elected president Trump stated in the memo, he would threaten to change part of the patriot act and cut off some of the funds Mexico received wire transfers. The memo also stated the majority of the $24 billion a year comes from illegal aliens that they send back home.
If Mexico agrees to make a one-time payment for the border wall Trump said, he would not move forward with the rule change.
The memo goes on to say it’s an easy decision to make for Mexico, make a one-time payment of $5 to $10 billion to ensure the $24 billion continues to flow enter the country year after year.
T he Mexican central bank was quoted saying that Mexicans living abroad nearly $25 billion home to their families last year. But a Government accountability office or earlier this year found it difficult much money Mexicans living illegally in the US sent home versus those legally.
Almost from the beginning Trump has stated to him voters will make Mexico pay for this wall, but this memo has more detail than he ever offered on how he could accomplish the. It even makes it down into a line: on the first day in office he announced the old rule change, on the second day in office Mexico would immediately protest, and the third day in office Trump tells Mexico if they pay for the wall he will not make a rule change.
It also says Trump claims that the US has leverage to businesses and tourist says and for important people in the Mexican and the US could increase a visa the such as on border crossing card to finance the wall.
For some time as GOP presidential runner as stated he would make Mexico pay for the wall. But this is the first time that he has suggested amending the cut off remittance payments and canceling the Visa’s.
The government of Mexico has made it clear that it won’t pay for the wall that Mr. Trump keeps proposing, and Mexican Pres. Enrique Peña Nieto said last August that trumps plan reflects complete an enormous ignorance for what Mexico represents and also the responsibility of the candidate saying. Also last month Mexican treasury secretary Luis Videgaray insisted that Mexico will not pay for this wall.
A sheriff in Oklahoma and one of his deputies were arrested on charges of extortion and bribery last week stemming from a traffic stop in which they use asset forfeiture, also known as legalized theft by government, when they extorted cash from a motorist in a car stop.
Sheriff Bob Colbert and Deputy Jeffrey Gragg from Wagner County Sheriff’s office took $10,000 in cash that they claimed was drug proceeds in a vehicle stop. The grand jury however decided that was actually a criminal activity that occurred on the Sheriff’s part and returned an indictment alleging the two officers had conspired to get the driver and his passenger to voluntarily hand over the cash for not pursuing drug charges against them.
The Sheriff and the deputy were booked and released at the jail last Thursday, and the grand jury is also recommended that the Sheriff be removed from office.
As this issue is being debated across the country, Oklahoma lawmakers and law enforcement are entering into serious debates about the asset forfeiture laws. And as in a report recently released by a Department of Justice asset forfeitures assets, in 2014, exceeded the total assets received by all the burglaries in this country combined. I think that is an interesting statistic myself.
Many people have become critical of the asset forfeiture system, including myself, as some call it policing for-profit. Now remember most of the assets that are forfeited never involved in any type of criminal charges ever been filed, and as it appears in this case it was used as a tool to extort money from these motorists. And this particular case has a strong odor of bribery to it.
The grand jury apparently felt that these law enforcement officers had stepped over the line between civil forfeiture and extortion.
Oklahoma attorney general claimed the driver and his passenger had initially claimed an ownership in the cash meaning they were prepared to challenge the seizure.
The Sheriff been arrested the men for possession of drug proceeds and took him to the jail for processing. One of the men told the Sheriff he was on parole at asked what he could do to stay out of jail, and Sheriff Gragg told him the only way he was going to go home was to disclaim ownership in the $10,000 cash
The grand jury felt that both Colbert and Gragg has accepted a bribe from Wallace and the passenger when he was forced to disclaim any interest in the cash. Both motorists, one of them being a juvenile, where immediately released and all records were destroyed. The cash was placed in a Sheriff’s drug forfeiture account with the County Treas.’s office.
That must be noted this cash did not go into the pockets of the officers and did go into the Sheriff’s Department forfeiture fund. An attorney for one of the officers claimed it was a routine drug interdiction and a lawful seizure.
The attorney also claimed that there is no evidence to support the accusation that jail records were deleted. And she’s probably right, how do you prove a record was deleted after it’s been deleted or destroyed?
I don’t know about you but forcing somebody to give up $10,000 cash and make it appear that the arrest never happened, as maybe become routine across this country and I personally consider that a problem.
I remember when the asset forfeiture programs were first started, and was a very good program to let criminals especially drug dealers pay for the law enforcement used against them. Then as usually what happens, because human nature sucks, it starts getting used in a large way that it was not intended. You have people that are not, nor ever, been involved in any type of criminal activity that are being stopped at the airports, on the roadways, while on vacation or traveling end up having their property taken away from them simply because law enforcement has decided to start policing for-profit.
It must be also noted that the adult motorist in the car had pled guilty in federal court last year to conspiring to distribute methamphetamine in Missouri, and instead of pursuing charges to keep a drug dealer off the street they chose to just take his money and let them continue on with his business.
That is flagrant policing for-profit and no longer law enforcement.
And the big difference here in this case is that the official records were deleted, where these type of activities have been going on for some time now and it is obvious that this type of activity can lead to a conflict of interest for law enforcement. Are they out to collect money from the public? Or are they out working against the criminal element?
There is one particular Oklahoma State Sen. that is fighting to remove all asset forfeiture abilities from law enforcement, I will not reveal his name because they love the grandstand for the media and I will give him his props when he actually does something and not talk about it.
He was quoted as saying this is just the latest sign of the practice that need to be overhauled in Oklahoma. He also stated that is an example of public safety taken a backseat to civil asset forfeiture and cash generation, and I agree the ability to pay for your freedom should not be an option in the criminal justice system because then it is nothing but a bribe not justice.
It must be noted to that there is outrage among the law enforcement community especially the police Chiefs Associations, in regards to the efforts to stop this ability. It obviously has become too large a part of their budgeting for them to now let it go that in itself shows what the problem is. And of course their stance is the efforts are anti-cop, Pro drug dealer, pro-terrorist.
I personally think there a lot of good hard-working men and women working in the law enforcement community, and these type of the abuses are rare but give them all a black eye and they need to step up and be part of the solution and not part of the problem.
I’ve had a few questions of late by some people that want some clarification on some of the legalities that are going on with this Carson et al. case. And I felt it might be beneficial to clarify some of the legalese of some of these documents that people may be looking at. Namely what is a Ramey warrant. I also attached the Korey Kauffman Ramey warrant at the bottom.
I went to a criminal defense lawyer blog for clarification to make sure I informed accurately, and basically this is what the blog stated and is what my understanding of what a Ramey warrant is:
a Ramey warrant is an arrest warrant there is obtained by a police agency by going directly to a judge and bypassing the district attorney.
Typically in order for a law enforcement agency to get a warrant they submit a report to the district attorney and if they feel there is enough evidence to file the case that agency can request that it be filed and a warrant for arrest be issued. This is what some people in the business call a walk through warrant. And that is the typical procedure that is followed especially in homicide cases.
However, a Ramey warrant, the officer submits a declaration to a judge setting out their reasons for requesting that warrant and the judge issues the warrant if the determines to be appropriate. Many times these type of warrants are requested and processed it during the off business hours or weekends.
So the question is why would a police agency choose to get a Ramey warrant instead of just a traditional way through the District Attorney’s Office? In my opinion basically it faces less scrutiny, as a District Attorney’s Office will review the paperwork, and it’s much easier to go to a friendly judge to get these warrants signed. It is also done when the officer feels that it will not face up to the scrutiny of the District Attorney’s Office and they may not file the charges so he goes to a judge in essence doing end around. This gives the officers authority to arrest and question the suspects with the hope of gaining more information, then basically submitting the information to the District Attorney’s Office and hope that they are willing to continue on with the case being filed by the DA.
The information I research also went on to say that these warrants are fairly rare, and in my experience in the past there were very few that I was involved with or aware of. And it’s pretty obvious that this is done when they feel they don’t have enough evidence to actually get charges filed.
So this does explain somewhat the lack of integrity in this case as I have said plenty of times I have been sitting there five months listening to testimony and have not heard anything of substance as of yet. In fact when one individual on my blog recently made comment about the Korey Kaufman murder I mentioned that I have not heard anything to prove that Korey Kaufman had been murdered. The only information that has been received that he has been murdered was by Robert Woody who has told many stories and now is more than willing to talk because and is currently in negotiations for a plea bargain in this case for his testimony.
Again I have repeated many times if Korey Kaufman was in fact killed at the hands of another he does deserve justice, there is no doubt in my mind about that. No matter what his lifestyle was or the issues involved that come with that.
Just for information I have also decided to post on here the criminal complaint filed with the court by deputy chief district attorney Marlisa Ferreira, this complaint was filed four days after the arrest of all the defendants, it appears that investigating officers in this case who have, in my opinion, used questionable tactics, and they did it end around the District Attorney’s Office in an effort to make arrests in this case thus forcing their hand and ultimately filing the charges.