← Full Measure After Hours
Full Measure After Hours
After Hours: Biden’s Building a Border Wall, After All (From the Archives)
00:26:54
Loading summary
Transcript44 lines
- [00:05]
A
Hi everybody. Cheryl Akison here. Welcome to another edition of Full Measure. After Hours today, after word came down late last year that the Biden administration is building new border barrier after all, we decided to go find it and see what the locals think about. Surprised a lot of people when they heard late last year that the Biden administration has dec to build some new border barrier along the Mexican border. After all, after saying that it wouldn't help and it doesn't do any good and does more harm than good. Now, the Biden administration, after making the case for it, ended up saying it wasn't changing its policies and ideas and that it doesn't think border walls work. It had said something quite different in writing and making the case for the wall, but it said that it simply had to spend funding to that was appropriated under the Trump administration, that they had no choice and they couldn't stop the funding so they had to go ahead and go through with it. But regardless, I decided to go find where some of this border fencing is going in. And that took me to Rio Grande City, Texas in Starr County. And this Sunday on May 5th on full measure, you will hear from some residents and officials there, most of them Democrats, I think. In fact, all of the ones I spoke to were Democrats because that's who you run into in these border towns most often. But they had some surprising views on all of this and on border politics in general, views that really conflict with the current Biden administrations. So in this podcast, you're going to hear from the Democrat mayor of Rio Grande City, Joel Villarreal, who took me to one of the spots where new barrier is being built and he has a lot to say about it.
- [01:58]
B
You brought us to this place. What, what are we going to be looking at here?
- [02:02]
C
Well, this here is President Biden's movable wall.
- [02:07]
B
And why do you call it that?
- [02:09]
C
Well, that's semantics. But nonetheless, it is considered movable because the way it is structured that apparently it's supposed to be moved or be able to move. But the reality is, again, I say semantics because once it is situated here, there's no way it's going to be moved. It's going to be a permanent fixture.
- [02:26]
B
Did they call it a movable wall because you think that was more palatable for people who don't really want a wall?
- [02:32]
C
Absolutely. I mean, when you're considering, and I go back to this, if I remember correctly, President Biden did mention during his campaign that he was not going to build another foot of border wall, which he's not. He's actually building 17 miles. Now, I know I'm being facetious here, but the reality is that you could say political expediency or not, but we are building a wall now. Both the state and the federal government, both parties are building a wallet as we speak.
- [03:01]
B
Why here? Do you know?
- [03:03]
C
Yeah. Border Patrol says, according to Border Patrol, which we did speak with them, that this would be an ideal location to move traffic outside and be easier accessible. And I'll keep in mind that the majority of individuals are self surrendering. So. And what do I mean by that is they're not hiding out here in the brush, they're actually self surrendering. Which brings up the question, will the wall have a significant impact on slowing down the influxes? And the answer is no. You're talking about half a mile from here is where the river's at. So people, once they get here, they already reached US soil. So of course we're going to have to process them as based on US laws so people will be apprehended. And by the way, law enforcement, they do a phenomenal job, which is border patrol, National Guard, of course, local, state and federal law enforcement agencies working together to address safety and security of our communities, which by the way, our community is pro law enforcement, pro rule of law, pro second Amendment, pro border security. The question is simply how? What is that right mixture of personnel, infrastructure and technology. So, and as I was mentioning earlier, when you're considering the technology, we already have a virtual wall. We have a virtual wall. You're looking at thousands of cameras, sensors, aerostat surveillance systems, drones, boats, planes, helicopters, directional listening devices, remote video surveillance system, mob technology. And I can go on and on, but the reality is we have a virtual wall and we are going to be spending millions of dollars for a wall that quite frankly is not going to stop the influxes. And it's really a false sense of safety and security. And again, I'm not anti border security, by all means. What I'm saying is we're spending so much money and the reality is that it's not going to have a significant impact on slowing down the influxes.
- [04:53]
B
Let me ask you a couple questions. How were you told that the federal government planned to build wall here?
- [04:59]
C
We sat down with Border Patrol and we have, by the way, under President Trump's administration and President Biden's administration, because we've had these conversations for several years already. And so we sat down with Border Patrol and this was the section that was. And by the way, there's 17 miles here in Stark county, two of which will be here in Rio Grande City. So it'll start here and go across this. And it's, like I said, it's a movable wall, or at least labels a movable wall, but there's nothing movable about it. But we see, you know, we work very closely together with border patrol and other law enforcement agencies. So we sat down, we had the conversation because at the end of the day, they're following, of course they're following the, the charge of their superiors was
- [05:48]
B
the thought that the numbers of people coming in here were significant and this was a good place for, for it.
- [05:53]
C
Why here, that question? Well, the RGV sector is one of the highest. And when you're talking, talking about Brownsville, the McAllen, the Rio around the city, you're talking about over 70 some thousand people since October 1st of 2023 up into today. So it is very active. The reality is that it is active. But as I mentioned, we have the technology to know who's coming in and out, bottom line. And the reality is this has been going on for decades. You know, we've had influxes under every president for the last several decades, whether it's Republican president or Democrat. And you have guns and money flow south and drugs and people flow north. And that's been, I mean, we've been seeing this for, for quite a bit of time. And unfortunately, we're continuing on the same trajectory. And 10 years from today, we might be having the same conversation. And unfortunately, and I hate to say this, we as a nation have failed to prioritize our broken immigration system, which it does require bipartisanship for long term viability. But the unfortunate fact remains that neither party is willing to bridge the political divide between immigration and border security, which, by the way, they're not mutually exclusive. They can't coexist. They can't coexist. On one end you have immigration, which we are a country of immigrants, of the people, by the people, for the people. And in fact, President Reagan said it best. One of the most important sources of America's greatness. For we lead the world because unique among nations, we draw our people, our strength from every country and every corner of the world. Now, on the other end, we do need more security. It is absolutely we must exercise caution against our global enemies exploiting our broken immigration system to reign terror on America. I mean, we have to. And in fact, and I'll say this a few, a Few months ago, 30 miles from where we stand here today, about 35 miles, went to a Migrant craft, migrant camp, Mexico. And several months ago you're talking about several hundreds of men age fighting men from Yemen, from Syria, from Iran, from China. And there were even 3,000, okay, 3,000 Russian military defectors at that camp. Of course, they're no longer there today. Where are they? I don't know, but they're not there. Now the question is, do we have to absolutely make sure we vet everyone that comes into the country? Yes, now, but when I say that, I have to exercise caution because some individuals that listen to that will only listen to the sound bite and extrapolate from this conversation, the sound bite that directly confirms their bias. And that's the unfortunate part because you're going to have the left and the right fighting over this. Whereas, hey, let's close the border versus no, let's bring everybody in and no, there's got to be a middle ground between catch and release and family separations because we cannot have family separations at the border, families that will never be reunited. But at the same time we cannot continue catch and release. There are legitimate concerns for national security and just having those thousands of men, age fighting men and some of them again, military trained people or men, and they're probably somewhere in the US now. Am I concerned about that? Absolutely. So then again, but how do we find that bridge, that political divide? And so far, unfortunately, D.C. hasn't been able to do that. And where are we going to go from here?
- [09:39]
B
Can you tell me when construction is supposed to start and what you think this wall is going to look like?
- [09:44]
C
It's going to be about 10ft. They mentioned 10 to 12ft. It'll have concrete at the bottom and it'll have some mechanisms to be able to lift it out of here. But in reality it's so heavy, again, it's going to, once it's here, it will be here permanently.
- [09:59]
B
And when does that start?
- [10:00]
C
Well, it's in the next several months. They can give us a specific date because it will be having the conversations with people in general. In fact, that's one of the questions that we had for them. Is it okay now that we have this conversation in case people are asking our constituents who do we give the information? And they give us some numbers of points of contact to make sure that they'll be answering their questions. Because one of the things we have to ensure here is that a lot
- [10:25]
B
of
- [10:27]
C
this land is privately owned and you have individuals with water rights and they need access to the river. Now the thing about the fence or the wall is that any land south of this wall will be condemned. For all practical purposes, it's condemned. So the value of your land, come on, it's condemned. But they want access to the river because again, they have water rights. So we need to make sure that they have a gate. And that's one of the conversations we've had both with the state and the federal government because again, the state is also building their portion. And we want to mitigate the circumstances or mitigate the situation to where these individuals that own the land here are able to access the river. And you're talking about land that's been in their families for generations. So we need to make sure, because the reality is now you have President Biden building the wall, Governor Abbott building the wall. And that's where, and I say this, and I've said this before, the hypocrisy is so nauseating. You know, on one end you have President Biden building the border barrier and again, going back to what I said earlier about not building another foot of border wall, and at the other end, he's suing Governor Abbott for building or erecting a border barrier. Inclusive enough. So why the charade?
- [11:43]
B
Let me ask you, why do you think the Turnaround at the 11th hour, why would the Biden administration now be building border wall?
- [11:51]
C
Political expediency. I mean, bottom line is people overall, as a country, they are seeing what's happening here. And the reality is that the circumstances, that when you're having individuals coming into the country and again, not properly vetted or catch and release, it's having an impact on the national, national perspective here. Why? Because it's affecting many other communities and we don't have the resources. There's a reason we don't have sanctuary cities along the border. One of it, of course, is it's law. We can't have any. But even before 2017, we've never had really sanctuary cities along the border because we cannot. There's no way we can. We don't have the resources to be able to provide for thousands of people at the expense and on the backs of the American taxpayers. There's no way. Now, when you're having a place like New York city that's spending $8 million a day, you know, two point some billion dollars a year to accommodate individuals. You know, and again, and that's one of the other things, if we're going to allow these folks to come in, you know, again, either way, I'm not saying whether they should be allowed or not, just simply if we're going to Allow them. We need to make sure we provide them the economic opportunity. Because illegal immigration is driven by economic opportunity now. I mean, it's economic opportunity. Yes, sometimes they claim asylum and whatnot, and there's a percentage that does. But the reality is it's economic opportunity, but we're not giving them that economic opportunity. Let's say in New York City, you have individuals that are there, but they can't work, so how are they going to fend for themselves? So if we're going to allow them in, my perspective is, okay, you're going to allow them in, make sure that they have the opportunity to be able to work and fend for themselves. Otherwise it's going to be a burden on the resources at that municipality or county and so on. So which only brings up when you're having to fight for resources and you have the locals versus individuals who are coming in. You know, it's not a right, a good mixture. There's going to be emotions that are going to fly because now you're actually tapping into resources that affects your community. Imagine if I have to use taxpayer money to address some of these needs for individuals who are coming in here undocumented. And it's unfortunate because now it's affecting your community. And to be quite frank, I'm not going to do that. I'm not going to do that because now you're tapping into something that is a federal issue that should be addressed at the federal level. No mayor or governor in America should bear the burden of a broken immigration system without the federal financial resources that are necessary to manage the flows. I mean, I just, again, it's not. I cannot fathom the idea that we're in this position and not having the resources that are necessary at all levels. Again, whether it's here in Rio Grande City, whether it's in New York City, whether it's Chicago and all these other places across the U.S. and it's an issue that Congress, D.C. the White House has failed to address and, you know, for decades. This is nothing new, unfortunately. And, and is it fair to say
- [15:03]
B
you're against the wall? I mean, I'm extrapolating from what you said.
- [15:06]
C
No, actually, I do believe that the wall in certain sections. See, we have 2,000 miles of southern border. There are sections along the 2,000 miles where a physical structure would be appropriate.
- [15:18]
B
I mean, here. How do you feel?
- [15:19]
C
Here we have a natural barrier already
- [15:22]
B
against building the wall here. Here?
- [15:23]
C
Absolutely. Why? Because we're spending millions of dollars. Imagine what I can do with those millions of dollars. 25, 35 million a mile. I mean, we can do quite a bit with that money. As opposed to having a wall that's not going to have the significant results. Again, you have individuals that are going to cross over, self surrender. That wall is not going to make a difference. In fact, I much rather have thousands of boots on the ground that will leave something here as opposed to a border barrier. We already have a virtual wall, as I mentioned. The technology is impressive. We already know who's coming in and out. Sometimes we don't have the personnel to go apprehend those individuals, but we already know. So the wall, is it going to be effective? Absolutely not. And I'm not one to spend money needlessly. I mean, what for? But somebody that had.
- [16:10]
B
Did Trump propose a wall here? Because he, I remember he did say that where there was natural barriers, he didn't think a wall was necessary. Do you remember?
- [16:19]
C
I agree with that.
- [16:20]
B
What had he proposed? Wall here.
- [16:22]
C
He proposed a wall here as well back in, during that administration. And there were some issues because the issue I have is this. I don't want any houses or any structure to be built. The wall needs to be built south of those structures. I don't want any structure to be south of the wall. Why? Because again, you're talking about the land is condemned, period. All this land will be condemned. So the idea, and by the way, it is such a beautiful river, this, the Rio Grande river, such a beautiful river. In fact, I've kayaked that river and it's so beautiful. And there's a pride, I mean pride and time. Real estate pristine. But unfortunately, because of the circumstances and the safety and security, there's some issues. But there was a time back in the 80s and early 90s that there were no issues as far as safety and security along this river.
- [17:24]
B
There's a current dispute between the federal government and the state government over building wall.
- [17:31]
C
Yes, there is. But right now the federal government is building the wall wall and so is the state. So we have President Biden's border wall and we have Governor Abbott's border wall as well. So state and federal government are at this point, as we speak, they're in the process of constructing the border wall. So now what we're trying to do is just to mitigate the circumstances for the landowners, make sure that they have access to the river because people have, have water rights. They need to make sure that they have access to the river. And as you can see, all this land, any land south of the wall is really condemned for all practical purposes, because you're not going to have any type of development or at least industry or any other type of commercial. And it's one of those questions that people have is you sell a certain portion of the land or in essence are you condemning so many other acres, as you can see talking about hundreds of acres back here.
- [18:24]
B
So let's walk this way. And do you have any idea how tall this wall is?
- [18:29]
C
It was 30, 30 some feet and 6ft into the ground and it's called a bollard type of wall. And but as you can see it does rust and there's going to be continued maintenance. These walls are not made to last for a long time. You're talking about several years and then you're going to have to continue on the maintenance side of it. So yes, it's the original cost of 25 to 35 million dollars per mile. However, it's only going to last several years and you're going to have to find the resources to accommodate this type of expense.
- [19:02]
B
Is any of this Trump border wall?
- [19:04]
C
Some of it is back over on the left side. And so there's Trump border wall, state
- [19:10]
B
border wall and Biden border wall.
- [19:12]
C
Biden is going to be the new one which was the movable wall that we talked about and that's over several miles from here.
- [19:19]
B
So this is Trump and state, Trump
- [19:22]
C
state and future President Biden's border wall, which again is called movable wall, but in reality it's a permanent fixture. It's not going to be moved once it's erected. So in essence you have the state, you have the federal government both constructing a border wall as we speak. And that's another topic for conversation when it comes to the disputes between the right and the left and, and Republicans and Democrats. But at the end of the day there's a wall and question is, who's benefiting by it is again at 25, $35 million. So yes, safety and security comes at an expense. And we talked about the aerostat surveillance systems which are the blimp like fixtures or blimps with military grade technology. And in a sense we have a virtual wall as I mentioned prior. So the question is, do we need this type of physical structure and like I said, do we? No. In fact there are some areas along the 2000 mile because remember we have a 2000 mile southern border. And yes, there are some areas that would benefit by having this type of structure and other areas would not, especially if you don't, they don't have a natural barrier like the Rio Grande river, but in essence. Okay, so we have a wall. How is this going to provide the safety and security? I guess the question is you have somebody that crosses, which by the way, the majority of people that cross through here are family units. Family units. So they're self surrendering. Here I am, please take me and okay, so people pick them up, go and process them. So these people are not trying to hide. They're here. And I mean at the sense, obviously the border policies that come with that, whether people are going to be expedited removals or remain in Mexico. And that's a different topic. Right, but it's all convoluted because at the end of the day, these are the policies that are affecting or driving the illegal immigration. But again, economic opportunities. And you do have the cartels that in a sense they talk to these folks and tell them how to proceed with and circumvent our asylum laws, for example. There's truth to that. Why? Because they know the system. And yes, they do play the system as well. But I have to exercise caution when I say that because some individuals will get that sound bite and again, just simply extrapolate from this conversation and drive their own message. Right. Which no. But yes, there is truth to it. You have individuals who claim asylum and in reality they should not be claiming asylum. They don't qualify, but unfortunately they do. And then of course that's another dilemma altogether between immigration and border security. And there are some folks that yes, they're legitimate concerns for asylum, but when you consider, if you look at the numbers, over 70% of asylum claims are denied, but by then people are already here 5, 6, 7, 10 years. So the question is, why is it that we're not proceeding at a much faster rate to make sure whether they're going to be allowed to come into the country or not? Why are we waiting 10 years, 12 years to adjudicate a case and then finally say, you know what? Nope. Because we're looking at almost 70% or a little bit over 70% of asylum claims are denied. So what is the issue? Which goes back to our broken immigration system that has so many issues? You know, I'm not saying we need to again, anti immigration. No, that's not the point. The point is how do we find a way to have a middle ground and address both, which I do believe that they can't coexist. They're not mutually exclusive. Immigration, border security. Absolutely. And if you ask border patrol agents, they know what needs to be done. Are we willing to do it? Do we have the political will to address it from that perspective, but at the same time not go to the pendulum swing which goes one extreme left or extreme right? And what I'm saying is, hey, where's the middle ground? Can we find that middle ground? And unfortunately we haven't been able to do so, or we're unwilling to do it.
- [23:32]
A
To watch the full story and see for yourself where this new border barrier is going up, and to hear from quite a few more locals, you can watch my report Sunday, May 5th on full measure. To find out how to watch, go to Cheryl Atkison.com, click the Full Measure tab for a list of TV stations and times. You can also always watch online, if that's easier, at fullmeasure news at about 9:31am Eastern Time, at Fullmeasure News on Sundays and then after it airs live, it is posted there online thereafter at fullmeasure News. I hope you enjoyed today's podcast and that if you did, you will leave a terrific review and share it with your friends. And check out my other podcast, the Cheryl Achison Podcast, for more takes on original topics and thought provoking subjects. I hope you will consider pre ordering my new book that's out September 3rd. It's called Follow the How Big Pharma Misleads, Obscures and Prevails. I guarantee you some information in there is going to blow your mind, but I also give you a lot of information that is empowering because it helps you understand the connections between politicians and the pharmaceutical industry and the media and doctors and how they get their education in med school and how the medical journals are manipulated. You can circumvent this managed system and get more factual, better, more helpful information about your health and the state of medicine in the US today. Pre order Follow the science wherever you like to order books, do your own research.
- [25:10]
B
Research.
- [25:10]
A
Make up your own mind. Think for yourself.