China’s first wide-publication in years of legal action that has led to the arrests of traffickers also follows weekend trade talks with the United States to prepare for a summit originally planned for the end of the month of the U.S. and Chinese leaders in Beijing.

U.S. President Donald Trump has postponed the visit over the Iran war, but said he would ​take the trip to Asia in “about five ‌or ⁠six weeks”.

Continue reading HERE

Source: https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/world/2026/03/19/china-cracks-down-fentanyl-networks-after-us-pressure/89224149007/?fbclid=IwY2xjawQqdq5leHRuA2FlbQIxMQBzcnRjBmFwcF9pZBAyMjIwMzkxNzg4MjAwODkyAAEeu0HTMPvAkdflwi0VmzQB97ceBWpxqemZORLFk-nCN1ZmYlv3OFdOvB6Ic58_aem_JhebWi5iVyVL-OrZR0P5qg

The post China cracks down on fentanyl networks after U.S. pressure first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

Trump blasted Petro in a Truth Social post.

Continue reading HERE

Source: https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2025/10/19/trump-calls-petro-illegal-drug-dealer-ends-all-payments-subsidies-to-colombia/

The post Trump Calls Petro ‘Illegal Drug Dealer,’ Ends All Payments, Subsidies to Colombia first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

The action day on July 29 led to 22 house searches, 18 arrests, and the seizure of munitions, vehicles, mobile phones and €22,000 in cash.

The criminal network, active since October 2020, consisted of Egyptian, Iraqi, Syrian and Romanian citizens. The criminal group had cells in the countries across the Balkan route from where regional facilitators managed the recruitment, accommodation and transport of migrants from Jordan, Iran, Iraq and Syria. Several criminal cells based in Romania facilitated the border crossing from Bulgaria and Serbia of groups of migrants and arranged their temporary accommodation in the area of Bucharest and in western Romania. The migrants were then smuggled to Hungary on their way to Germany as a final destination. In total, 26 illegal transports of migrants were intercepted and 490 migrants were detected in an attempt to illegally cross the Romanian border. The criminal group was involved in other criminal activities such as drug trafficking, document fraud and property crime.

Migrants were paying between € 4,000 and € 10,000 depending on the trafficking segment. For example, the price for facilitating the crossing from Romania to Germany was between € 4,000 and € 5,000. The migrants, some of which were families with young children, were accommodated in extremely poor conditions, often with no access to toilets or running water. For the safe houses, the suspects rented accommodations or used the residences of group members, mainly situated in the areas of Călărași County, Ialomița County and Timișoara. In one of the safe houses, measuring about 60 m2, the suspects hid 100 people at the same time. The migrants were then transferred in risky conditions in overcrowded lorries between merchandise and in vans hidden in concealments without proper ventilation.

Europol facilitated the exchange of information and provided analytical support. On the action day, Europol deployed one analyst to Romania to cross-check operational information against Europol’s databases in real time to provide leads to investigators in the field.

Source: https://www.hstoday.us/subject-matter-areas/border-security/18-arrests-in-migrant-smuggling-operation-on-the-balkan-route/

The post 18 Arrests in Migrant Smuggling Operation on the Balkan Route first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

The post Hannity: System-wide meltdown at our southern border first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

The post Hannity: System-wide meltdown at our southern border first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

For years, migrants from West African countries used Niger as a crossing ground on their way to Libya and then onto Europe. But in 2016, under mounting pressure from the EU, Niger began criminalizing immigration and patrolling the deserts for illegal crossings.

“The road is practically closed because of the police,” John Okoroafor, who traveled from Nigeria only to end up imprisoned in Agadez, told VICE News. “They are not taking anything for granted.”

For the EU, this arrangement has led to a dramatic decrease in refugees and migrants on their doorstep. For Niger, it’s meant a 1 billion–euro aid and defense package. But the success comes at a heavy cost: Niger’s jail cells are now packed with migrants and refugees. And the increasingly harsh policy has given birth to a new underworld of illegal activity that EU politicians warn could be creating even bigger problems for the region.

“It has gone underground,” Malin Björk, a member of the European Parliament from Sweden, told VICE News of Niger’s migration economy. “We have seen a larger and more organized network so that more organized crime is taking over. And that certainly can’t be seen as a security progress in any way.”

Niger says drug smuggling, for example, has soared over the last two years. In the country’s capital Niamey, officials showed VICE News a basement packed to the brim with illegal drugs they’d confiscated recently. They also warned that weapons trafficking is on the rise as a result of the new immigration policies.

VICE News traveled to Niger to speak to both authorities and smugglers about the EU’s evolving immigration policy and the new trafficking businesses it’s spawned.

Source: https://news.vice.com/en_us/article/pan8kk/heres-what-the-european-union-did-to-stop-migrants-from-coming

The post Here’s what the European Union did to stop migrants from coming first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

After being rebuffed by the U.S. Congress in his request for $5.7 billion to help build the wall that was a signature 2016 campaign promise, Trump on Friday invoked emergency powers given to the president under a 1976 law. The move, according to the White House, enables Trump to bypass lawmakers and redirect money already appropriated by Congress for other purposes and use it for wall construction.

Peter Shane, a professor at Ohio State University’s Moritz College of Law, said challenges to the emergency declaration could end up as a replay of the legal battle against Trump’s travel ban targeting people from several Muslim-majority nations. The Supreme Court last year upheld the travel ban after lower courts had ruled against Trump, with the justices giving the president deference on immigration and national security issues.

Trump has painted illegal immigration and drug trafficking across the border as a national security threat.

“Courts are reluctant to second-guess the president on matters of national security,” Shane said.

Democrats, state attorneys general and at least one advocacy group have vowed to take the Republican president to court over the declaration.

“I’ll sign the final papers as soon as I get into the Oval Office and we’ll have a national emergency and then we’ll be sued,” Trump said at the White House.

The National Emergencies Act of 1976 has been invoked dozens of times by presidents without a single successful legal challenge. Congress never defined a national emergency in the law.

The legal experts said Trump’s declaration could be challenged on at least two fronts: that there is no genuine emergency and that Trump’s action overstepped his powers because under the U.S. Constitution Congress has authority over federal appropriations, not the president.

Trump made the declaration after asking Congress to appropriate $5.7 billion for wall construction and lawmakers gave him none.

The Supreme Court has a 5-4 conservative majority that includes two justices appointed by Trump, Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch. Chief Justice John Roberts has emerged as the court’s swing vote, and the decision on the legality of Trump’s action could come down to him.

“The handwriting is on the wall here,” said Steven Schwinn, a professor at the John Marshall Law School in Chicago. “The Supreme Court is almost certain to uphold President Trump’s emergency.”

Legal experts said the 1976 law gives presidents vast discretion. Trump plans to redirect $6.7 billion in federal funds to pay for a wall, money that would come from a U.S. treasury forfeiture fund, a defense counter-drug program and the military construction budget.

“The odds favor the president by a significant majority,” George Washington University Law School professor Jonathan Turley said. “He has the authority to make the declaration and he has the money.”

But the administration’s defense of Trump’s action may not be a smooth ride. Lawsuits could delay the use of funds the president is planning to tap, and legal experts said the bulk of funds may be tied up for years.

Trump is running for re-election next year and a loss would mean his presidency ends in January 2021. It is possible the legal fight over the emergency declaration might not be resolved by then.

“My guess is the money, the significant amount of money, won’t flow before the 2020 election,” Harvard Law School professor Mark Tushnet said.

Nancy Pelosi, the Democratic speaker of the House of Representatives, and Chuck Schumer, the Republican-led Senate’s top Democrat, said Trump actions “clearly violate the Congress’s exclusive power of the purse.”

Congress is unlikely to muster a veto-proof majority to vote down Trump’s emergency move. The Democratic-led House could try to sue, but courts generally do not allow Congress to litigate after lawmakers fail to legislate, the legal experts said.

States may lead the fight. California Governor Gavin Newsom and state Attorney General Xavier Becerra, both Democrats, said they anticipated they would sue, saying the state would be harmed because Trump’s action could drain money from its drug-fighting efforts, endangering its residents.

One possible advantage for California is that its case likely could at some point go to the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which has dealt Trump setbacks on previous policies including the travel ban and potentially could impose or uphold an injunction against the emergency declaration.

Legal experts said landowners along the border could sue because they face the imminent threat of land seizure by the federal government to build the wall.

Opponents may have more traction arguing that the president is unlawfully trying to tap funds Congress appropriated for the Pentagon, the experts said. The Defense Department construction money that Trump wants has almost never been used for domestic construction. In addition, Congress required the money be spent supporting military operations, and opponents could argue the border wall fails to qualify.

The post Legal challenges to Trump emergency declaration face uphill battle first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.