Connect with us


John Kelly and James Mattis Prevented Trump from Using Troops to Defend the Border from Illegal Invasion



James Fulford of VDare revealed that retired generals John Kelly and James Mattis played an instrumental role in preventing President Donald Trump from using U.S. troops on the southern border.

Kelly was the Chief of Staff and Mattis was the United States Secretary of Defense under the Trump administration.

According to Fulford, the two former Trump administration officials believed that the Posse Comitatus Act prevents American Armed Forces from defending the country from invasion.

Trending: 74-Year Old Phoenix Asian Man Killed in Unprovoked Parking Lot Assault

Fulford noted the following:

take our poll - story continues below

POLL: Would you vote for Donald Trump in 2024?

  • POLL: Would you vote for Donald Trump in 2024? 

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 is intended to prevent the US Army from being used on Americans. In the anti-terrorist panic after 9/11, various people made noises about suspending it. (One of them was Joe Biden.)

In sum, the Posse Comitatus Act prevents the U.S. army from being deployed against Americans, but it says nothing about protecting the border, which deals with keeping foreigners out — a whole separate matter.

He cited excerpts from the book Border Wars: Inside Trump’s Assault on Immigration, authored by Julie Hirschfeld Davis and Michael D. Shear:

  • Mattis was taken aback, although his dour expression betrayed no emotion. Under a late-nineteenth-century law known as the Posse Comitatus Act, much of the military was barred from performing domestic law enforcement duties, such as policing a border, and the principle had long been seen as sacrosanct.
  • …Kelly tried to explain the limits of what the troops were allowed to do at the border. They could help fortify it with barbed wire and build tent cities to help ease the crunch on ICE and CBP, which were rapidly running out of space to hold migrants. But military personnel couldn’t actually touch a migrant, either to detain one or to provide any kind of care or service. And they certainly could not use force to push them back, Kelly explained. Trump was not hearing him.
  • [Trump] talked extensively about the role of the military, and, under questioning by reporters covering his comments, suggested that the troops might use lethal force to confront immigrants at the border. Asked what the American forces would do if migrants threw rocks, Trump answered: “If they want to throw rocks at our military, our military fights back,” the president said. “I told them, ‘Consider it a rifle.’?”
  • Nielsen and her top aides, who were traveling to New York for meetings and had watched Trump’s remarks on Fox News, were horrified. The president had just suggested, in comments carried live on TV, that American soldiers had license to shoot to kill migrants at the border. Once again, they dropped everything to head off a presidentially created crisis. Nielsen frantically asked her staff to find the CBP use of force policy and send it over to the White House immediately. Someone had to show it to Trump and get him to walk back his comments right away, she said. Kevin McAleenan, the CBP chief, called DHS lawyers to discuss the policy. The rules were very clear. They stated that DHS personnel “may use deadly force only when necessary, that is, when the officer/agent has a reasonable belief that the subject of such force poses an imminent danger of serious physical injury or death to the officer/agent or to another person.” If migrants were throwing rocks, it would have to be met with commensurate nonlethal force—not live ammunition from rifles, as the president had suggested.
  • Trump appeared to get the message, and he backed off publicly from the idea of the military firing on migrants. When reporters asked him about it the next day, he said rock throwers would be arrested, and responded to a question about whether he could promise that the U.S. military wouldn’t shoot at civilians at the border by saying, “Well, I hope they won’t.” But privately, Trump badly wanted to find a way that they could. A few days later, in a meeting with DHS officials, the president brought up the idea again. Listen, I get it, okay? he told them. If someone throws a rock, you can’t shoot to kill. But would it be okay just to injure them? What if we shoot these migrants in the legs? To slow them down? That’s not lethal force, right? Nielsen and her aides were flabbergasted. No, they responded quickly. That’s not allowed either.

This goes to show how entrenched certain open borders interests are in D.C.

The mass migration ideology has permeated across the political spectrum, so Trump has few hiring options available to actually implement his America First policies.

As is life in D.C….


Mara Elvira Salazar is No Friend of America First Nationalism

Republican leaders would be wise to ignore all of her political advice.



If there’s one Republican leader that young activists should never listen to, it’s Florida Congresswoman Maria Elvira Salazar. 

Salazar, who is a Cuban American, has been an outspoken advocate of loosening U.S. immigration laws. In fact, she even confronted known immigration hawk and key Trump adviser Stephen Miller at a Republican Study Committee weekly lunch on February 24, 2021. She specifically criticized Trump’s immigration message and demanded that the GOP be more inclusive in its outreach.

“I told him [Miller] that the GOP needs to attract the browns,” stated Salazar. “We, for the last 30 years since Ronald Reagan, have not sent the right message to the browns,” she continued. “Reagan was the last guy who gave a path to citizenship to 3 million people … 35 years ago. It’s time for us to do the same thing that Reagan did.”

Salazar doubled down on her pro-immigration message when she went on Larry Kudlow’s show on March 2 and declared that former President Donald Trump would have done better with Hispanics by advocating for looser immigration. Journalist Ryan Girdusky noted how some of Trump’s advisers were already pushing for amnesty lite policies:

Girdusky added that Salazar was rather unhinged in her criticism of Miller’s vision for the GOP:

Salazar made a lot of noise about the Hispanic vote, despite ignoring how Trump improved his Hispanic numbers between 2016 and his re-election bid in 2020 from 28% to 32%. And he did so without much Hispandering or campaigning on passing amnesty. 

The unsavory fact that the GOP consultant class and the likes of Salazar refuse to acknowledge is that the Black Lives Matter unrest alone likely pushed significant segments of the Hispanic population into the Democrats’ arms. BLM radicalism alienated Americans of all backgrounds., but Hispanics were not having any of this kind of ruckus. Even Hispanic Democrats, of all groups, largely supported strong military action during the riots.

In reality, Hispanic support for Trump is largely based on his bluster and political bluntness, which many minority groups find comfort in. 

However, Republicans like Salazar gets it all wrong by thinking that expanding immigration both legal and illegal is a key to the Republican Party success. The Republican Party will have to concede that they can make gains with Hispanics at the margins but they cannot expect to win the majority of the Hispanic vote due to Hispanics’ propensity to support many causes ranging from gun control to more government involvement in healthcare. Data from the Pew Research Center demonstrates these beliefs among Hispanics. Nevertheless, there are some avenues for outreach with this demographic  but they must be done right. 

The key for Republican success is the white working class voters, which played a crucial role in putting Trump over the top in the Midwest back in 2016. These voters are not the most reliable in terms of turnout, but they comprise a vast segment of the American electorate. Any candidate who can activate them could potentially build a hegemonic electoral coalition for years to come. The goal for a sane Republican campaign is to maximize turnout and support among the WWC. 

Such inroads with WWC voters are more important than meeting a diversity quota the likes of Salazar and naive Republican strategists would like the party to pursue. Any nationalist campaign worth its salt would be promoting the following: Infrastructure projects targeting the Midwest, the restriction of both illegal and legal immigration, and re-shoring programs to bring jobs back. 

On the other hand, following Salazar’s program is the way that the GOP will become irrelevant and alienate many WWC voters who are already on the fence with regards to the Republican Party. These voters are not going to gravitate towards Republicans just because of the “R” next to their name. They still must be catered to and pushing for amnesty is one way to turn working class voters off.

Under Salazar’s watch, the GOP will simply be going back to the politically correct ways of the Bush administration. To tap into the sleeping giants that is the WWC, Republican leaders should ignore everything Salazar has to say and get fully behind nationalist policies such as immigration restriction, infrastructure development, and re-shoring. 


Continue Reading
It's time to name Antifa a terror org! Sign your petition now!