Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Migrant Caravan and Midterms on Collision Course

Migrant Caravan and Midterms on Collision Course

Trump urges Mexico to help stop the caravan and says he will use the military to secure the border if necessary

Back in April, we covered the thousands of “migrants” who composed a caravan with the intent of gaining access (including illegal access) to the United States.  Now, yet another caravan of illegal aliens is careening toward our Southern border.

The illegal aliens broke through the border fence and surged into Mexico, overwhelming the on-looking Mexican border control officials.

The Daily Caller reports:

Hundreds of migrants traveling in a caravan broke open a border fence and poured into Mexico on Friday afternoon, just hours after the Mexican government said it would begin granting humanitarian visas to those who qualify for asylum.

The migrants are part of a group of more than 3,000 people who have been traveling north through Honduras and Guatemala since last week, with the aim of passing through Mexico to get to the U.S.

Video footage posted by Telemundo News shows hundreds of the migrants massed behind a chain-link fence at the Mexico-Guatemala border. Some of the men scale the fence while others violently shake it, causing the barrier to break apart.

As the gap in the fence widens, the migrants — mostly young, single men — rush into Mexican territory while overwhelmed border officials stand aside.


So hordes of illegal aliens who are rushing to cross our border think our president is the anti-Christ? Why on earth would anyone attempt to force their way into a country one believes is ruled by the anti-Christ? Doesn’t this undermine the argument that they love our country and are chasing the American Dream, a better future?

Since Friday’s reports, the caravan has swelled to over 5,000.

CBS News reports:

Despite Mexican efforts to stop them at the border, about 2,000 Central American migrants swam or rafted across a river separating that country from Guatemala, re-formed their mass caravan in Mexico and vowed to resume their journey toward the United States.

Their numbers swelled to about 5,000 overnight and at first light they set out walking toward the Mexican town of Tapachula, 10 abreast in a line stretching approximately a mile.

It was not immediately clear where the additional travelers had materialized from since about 2,000 gathered on the Mexican side Saturday night. They seemed likely to be people who had been waiting on the bridge over the Suchiate River or in the Guatemalan town of Tecun Uman and who decided to cross during the night.

According to Fox News, the exact number of illegal aliens in this caravan is likely much higher, up to 10,000.

The caravan, numbering anywhere from 5,000 to 10,000, is composed of young, unemployed men, women with children, some families and unaccompanied juveniles. Most are from Honduras.

.  . . .  Mexican officials say some 5,100 to 7,200 migrants registered to stay in the shelters of Cuidad Hidalgo, with another 2,000 chose to camp in the town square. Earlier in the day, the Mexican government estimated 2,000 remained in Guatemala.

Mexico says some 640 asylum claims have been processed since Friday. Many other immigrants waded across the Suchiate guided by a tow rope or took one of dozens of rafts that ply these waters daily. Mexico said “900” arrived in such “unauthorized means.”

From the images available, the caravan seems to be composed of mostly young males, with the few women and children placed at the front.

According to the following report from Fox News, the women and children have been strategically placed in front to act as “shields” and to “intimidate” Mexican border patrol officials.


For his part, President Trump urged Honduras, Guatemala, and El Salvador to stop the caravan before it reaches our southern border and says that he will use the military to secure the border if the caravan makes it that far.

Trump has made it clear that his position on our borders is drastically different than that of open borders Democrats and is referring to the November midterms as about Kavanaugh and the caravan: ““This will be an election of Kavanaugh, the caravan, law and order and common sense.”


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Capture them, detain them, load on c-130 and parachute them back into their home country. No more dangerous than the trek they’ve taken across mexico

If that migrant band arrives at the border just before the election. We should provide a military escort all the way up to Canada.

Instead of staying at home and making their countries more like ours, they’re coming here to make our country more like theirs.

Thank you Republicans, Democrats and socialists.

Bucky Barkingham | October 21, 2018 at 3:34 pm

Apparently the Lefties think that this invasion force will benefit them at the polls. They may be correct as far as their captive blue states are concerned but red state voters may not see kit the same way. IMHO many independent voters will not be sympathetic to the idea of a horde of illegals storming our southern border.

I want to say one word to you. Just one word. Napalm.

If 5000 Russian,Chinese, North Koreans crashed our shores, it would be considered an invasion. Time to call the military in an tell Mexico to stop them or we will and they will pay for it.

Has anyone heard of Mariel boat-lift?

The arrival of the refugees in the U.S. created political problems for U.S. president Jimmy Carter. His administration struggled to develop a consistent response to the immigrants, and it was discovered that a number of the refugees had been released from Cuban jails and mental health facilities. The Mariel boatlift was ended by mutual agreement between the two governments in late October 1980. By that time as many as 125,000 Cubans had reached Florida.

We need to hold countries accountable. I say we create a safe zone protected by our military in a south american country and send them all their. Use the aid we would normally give to those countries for the feeding and care of their own people. All dollars spent would be on american goods.

The optics and description are the basic same as with the Islamic hoard swamping Europe.Mexico has offered safe haven… but it is money money money for the mob and votes votes votes for Dems and a step closer to one party rule. The reports favor women and children but the real makeup is different. Who planned, funded and supports this “soft” invasion. When they reach the US border, the women and children will be in the front and MSM will be there.

US military will have to stop them on the Mexico side of the border. We will need to set up a quarantine buffer zone . That means invading Mexico right where the cartels are situated. Great..just great. Find out who the planners are and arrest them…. Alinsky them.

    C. Lashown in reply to alaskabob. | October 21, 2018 at 6:42 pm

    re: “Find out who the planners are and arrest them…. Alinsky them.”

    AND who does crappy stunts like this? Hmmm…From the same school of photo opps that brought America the Kavanaugh kerfuffle…Obama, Soros, Clinton, Holder, the DNC, Antifa and similar varieties of pond scum.

We’ve beat back the British, Third Reich and Japanese Imperial Army. Held the Soviet Empire in check for decades.

What’s the point of Arlington National Cemetery if the sacrifices of those lay there are so easily desecrated by lawless, entitled migrants who violate our hard-won sovereign borders?

This is nothing short of an act of war.

ScottTheEngineer | October 21, 2018 at 5:47 pm

They’ll be here just in time for the midterms and the cold weather. We get to be treated to constant images of shivering children left out in the cold but who’s paying them to come?
Democrats are pure fucking evil.

    C. Lashown in reply to ScottTheEngineer. | October 21, 2018 at 6:51 pm

    THIS IS ONLY THE START… There are still 2 more years until the next federal election – plenty of time for the socialists to plan something exceptionally nasty and destructive for America.

    The Dems and the left remind me of different characters portrayed by Hollywood; the rejected woman goes on a terror tantrum, swearing if she can’t have ‘him’ than nobody else can have him either. She then proceeds to make everyone’s life miserable while destroying whatever she can get her hands on.

The left and the media want a ” water-cannon ” moment.. or even, a dead infant on the beach moment. Shivering, wet women and kids.. .young men saying they are in fear for their lives, etc.

I’m trying to think of history and how to deal with incidents like this. I think of maybe refugees at Gaza.. trying to force a issue.. there is no good way to lock them out and not have the press spin it to the max, and a compliant UN and Democrats and RINO’s willing to undercut any backbone and resolve.

I don’t know how to diffuse this without the desired human chaos and tragedy that the NGO’s, the left and the media desire. They want this. The PLO model. Trump’s America = Israel. U.N. condemnation to follow. Everyone pile on. The media are going to run this up to outrage level 11.

This invasion is an act of war. Anyone who’s aided is either a traitor, or an enemy combatant. (Hear that, soros, and the rest of you swamp rats?)

Deploying the military to stop them assumes that they plan to storm the border en masse. But previous caravans have not done that. Their modus operandi seems to be to travel through Mexico in caravan for mutual protection, but when they reach the border they dissolve and it’s each for themselves as they try to slip across the border individually, just like all the others who come over every day. The military can’t do much about that, just as it can’t do much about the usual daily infiltrators.

    Observer in reply to Milhouse. | October 21, 2018 at 8:42 pm

    They don’t come across individually so much anymore, they come across in groups, ranging from a dozen or so to a hundred or more. And they don’t try to avoid Border Patrol either. Instead (having been coached by the globalists), they go straight to them and assert claims for asylum. They know that once they’ve requested asylum, they get released into the U.S. pending a hearing, and because the immigration system has been deliberately overwhelmed with huge numbers, the hearing dates are now years off in the future.

    BTW, Border Patrol apprehended more than 16,000 illegal aliens, or more than 4 times the original size of the latest “migrant caravan” in the month of September 2018 alone. And BP only catches a fraction of the illegal aliens who cross the southern border, so you can be sure that thousands more made it through undetected.

    Trump should call on congress and ask them to immediately impose a moratorium on new asylum claims for anyone from Mexico or the Central American nations (Honduras, Guatemala, El Salvador, etc.) that have been so grossly abusing our asylum system.

    These abuses are deliberate, they have been going on for years now, and so far there have been no real consequences for them. Refusing to consider any new asylum claims from citizens of these countries, until the backlog of claims has been cleared, will at least show that there can be adverse consequences for gaming the system, and it will reduce some of the incentives for these people to come here and assert phony claims.

    We still need massive reforms to our immigration laws, but we can act to curb some of the asylum abuses now, if we have the political will to do it.

      Hexenjager in reply to Observer. | October 21, 2018 at 10:14 pm

      I’m just a geek and not a lawyer (much less a Constitutional Lawyer), but cannot President Donald Trump just “close” immigration, including asylum seekers, to any country south of the US border? In a general sense, I thought POTUS had the Constitutional power to determine who can and cannot come into this country. The “travel ban” being a perfect example. If this is so, then why would he need COTUS to act at all?

      BTW, this is a serious question because I don’t know the answer.

        Milhouse in reply to Hexenjager. | October 22, 2018 at 1:08 am

        No, the president has no constitutional power over immigration. Congress does, not the president. (Even that is not in the actual constitution, but is an invention of the Supreme Court in the late 19th century, which poses a problem for originalists, but for now that’s the law.) Congress has given the president pretty broad authority to control immigration, but not complete authority. He still has to stick to the as Congress wrote it. One limit is that in issuing visas he can’t discriminate on the basis of race, religion, etc. That’s where some of the recent judicial interference has come from. Another is that Congress legislated that anyone who presents themselves with an asylum claim is entitled to a hearing. So it would take Congress to amend that.

        Getting Congress to do so will have to wait for the next session, which will hopefully have solid R majorities in both houses, so they can afford to lose some wafflers and still pass the measure. It will also, however, require a firm resolve that if any judge enjoins it the president will ignore the injunction. Otherwise don’t bother.

The asylum game isn’t a free ticket to any ol’ place. It happens at the first country a refugee (real or fake) gets to, and no further. “Refugee” Hondurans are Guatemala’s problem. “Refugee” Guatemalans are Mexico’s problem. Neither are America’s problem, even by weenie UN standards.

The Mexican border is Mexico’s big problem right now. If the US tightens up on the border, half a trillion dollars in annual trade will be affected. It’s obviously in Mexico’s interests—if the President isn’t bluffing—to stop this foolishness long before it approaches the US border.

Land mines. Far cheaper than a wall

This whole thing is such laughable bullshit.

Every liberal media story features pictures of crying children or women when they talk about this caravan.

Actual video of the caravan? 90%+ young men.

Am I the only one thinking that if these people put half this much effort into working together to improve local conditions in their own country, there would be no need for them to migrate here?

Trump has been totally ineffective in stemming the tide.

Decades of immigration reform (e.g. anti-nativism) and avoidance of emigration reform has consequences and produces collateral damage.

What the POTUS has said he is going to do is CLOSE the Southern border. If he closes the border to all traffic, then he can use the military to stop anyone from crossing the border, as it then becomes a national security issue and the people crossing the border are invaders. This allows them to be handled by the military as enemy combatants, which means they do not have to be processed by civil authorities. And, he can do this without any action by the Congress.

    Ragspierre in reply to Mac45. | October 22, 2018 at 6:14 am

    You seem to absolutely revel in bullshit, stated didactically.

    Milhouse in reply to Mac45. | October 22, 2018 at 11:25 am

    Legally, that doesn’t work.

      Mac45 in reply to Milhouse. | October 22, 2018 at 11:33 am

      Really? Please explain your statement.

        Ragspierre in reply to Mac45. | October 22, 2018 at 2:18 pm

        The problem is with the Congress, not with Trump. Trump can only follow the laws, as written. So far, trump has done everything that he waid he would, which he can do under existing law. The problem is the ridiculous and unrealistic laws and court decisions governing immigration procedures. Realistically, Trump has to allow many of these people into the country, if they claim asylum.


        You are literally a cartoon.

Labor camps. The invaders who enter the USA who want to eat will work 12-hour days to grow their food and tend to livestock.

Tools to craft apparel and shoes and other basics and raw materials provided. Minimum wage paid but costs of tools and raw materials will take all those wages. No entry into the general population. They are invaders and will be treated as such.

The only entertainment is what they provide. Rules are enforced with penalties varying from flogging to immediate deportation of a person and if they belong to a family unit the entire family is back to Honduras. Make the fate of reaching and invading the USA an undesirable event.

    Milhouse in reply to Obbop. | October 22, 2018 at 11:31 am

    The president has no authority to do this. Does Congress? I’m not sure it does. If there’s a big enough R majority it could try it and see.

    One thing I’m pretty sure of: you can call them whatever names you like, but legally they are not invaders, and calling them that won’t make it so.

      txvet2 in reply to Milhouse. | October 22, 2018 at 1:27 pm

      “”legally they are not invaders””


        Milhouse in reply to txvet2. | October 22, 2018 at 4:26 pm

        The definition of invasion is “incursion of an army for conquest or plunder”. These people are not an army, they do not represent any entity, let alone a sovereign one, and they seek neither conquest nor plunder. They have nothing in common with invaders, and the president can’t change that merely by calling them that name.

          Arminius in reply to Milhouse. | October 22, 2018 at 8:07 pm

          What do you mean they’re not coming for conquest? Of course they are; this is the reconquista of Aztlan playing out right before your eyes. If you listen to them, they’ll tell you that. I’ve heard it directly from El Salvadoran and Honduran school children, even. And of course they’re coming for plunder in the form of Welfare benefits, and sanctuary cities and states will give it to them. There are laws denying them federal benefits; that’s it.

          Who do you think is organizing and funding this, and why?

          txvet2 in reply to Milhouse. | October 23, 2018 at 12:16 am

          That’s ONE definition, but not the only one:

          Per “(1) an act or instance of invading or entering as an enemy, especially by an army.
          (2) the entrance or advent of anything troublesome or harmful, as disease.
          (3) entrance as if to take possession or overrun ”

          Per Cambridge Dictionary: (among others)

          “an occasion when a large number of people or things come to a place in an annoying and unwanted way: ”

          Now, once again, since you claim LEGAL precedent to declare this not an invasion, please provide a reference to the law and/or legal precedent for your claim.

That’s ONE definition, but not the only one:

Per “(1) an act or instance of invading or entering as an enemy, especially by an army.
(2) the entrance or advent of anything troublesome or harmful, as disease.
(3) entrance as if to take possession or overrun ”

Per Cambridge Dictionary: (among others)

“an occasion when a large number of people or things come to a place in an annoying and unwanted way: ”

Now, once again, since you claim LEGAL precedent to declare this not an invasion, please provide a reference to the law and/or legal precedent for your claim.

txvet2I figured Milhouse would use the most self-serving definition of invasion as possible. But no matter. Trump has plenty of constitutional and statutory authority to seal the border and use the military to block this invasion.

10 U.S.C. §252.1 Use of militia and armed forces to enforce Federal authority

Whenever the President considers that unlawful obstructions, combinations, or assemblages, or rebellion against the authority of the United States, make it impracticable to enforce the laws of the United States in any State by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings, he may call into Federal service such of the militia of any State, and use such of the armed forces, as he considers necessary to enforce those laws or to suppress the rebellion.

(Aug. 10, 1956, ch. 1041, 70A Stat. 15, §332; Pub. L. 109–163, div. A, title X, §1057(a)(2), Jan. 6, 2006, 119 Stat. 3440; renumbered §252, Pub. L. 114–328, div. A, title XII, §1241(a)(2), Dec. 23, 2016, 130 Stat. 2497.)

Milhouse can play word games and quibble about the definitions of invasion all he wants. But they are by definition an assemblage, and they have demonstrated their intent to violate International law (which demands that they apply for asylum in the first safe country they enter), they have demonstrated their intent to violate Mexican law by violently crossing their border with Guatemala, and in fact the organizers of these caravans (this is not the first one, just the largest so far) that they have no intention of complying with Mexican or US asylum laws.

Seriously? These people didn’t write that communist manifesto.

“We are a group of people from different nations, religions, genders, gender expressions, sexual orientations, migrating and seeking refuge. We seek to become on collective, supporting each other shoulder to shoulder and demonstrating that by uniting we can abolish borders.”

They have specific demands for certain countries.

“We demand of Mexico and the United States:

* That they respect our rights as refugees and our right to dignified work to be able to support our families

* That they open the borders to us because we are as much citizens as the people of the countries where we are and/or travel”

It’s insane to insist, as Milhouse does that this isn’t an invasion. They’ve declared our citizenship laws invalid, that they are citizens of Mexico and citizens of the United States. And they are citizens of wherever they travel, so if they choose to go to Canada they’re citizens of that country, too.

This is complete BS. Trump would be right to close all legal ports of entry, as Reagan did after the drug cartels kidnapped, tortured and murdered US DEA agent Camarena in 1985. Not legal ports of entries, not means of legally requesting asylum. A process they don’t intend to comply with, as they are now refusing to obey Mexican law (which, believe it or not, actually has been revised to comply with their international obligations).

In this case, since it’s an express statutory exception to the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 the US military can directly enforce federal laws, most especially the laws these illegal aliens intend to violate and through collective disobedience intend to abolish. And, remember, there is nothing in the Constitution that says the US militia (including the federal armed forces) CAN NOT enforce federal law. Only a statute prohibited that. There are numerous examples of US militia forces (both regular as well as National Guard) enforcing federal law both before and after the Act of 1878.

believe it was ike who did deploy the 82nd to montgomery and threatened to do the same in arkansas

trump has the authority–he needs to follow through