patrick.net

On the Lord’s Day yesterday, “peaceful protesters” summoned fleets of confused, driverless Waymos, which they converted into self-driving Molotovs — a use case the engineers never beta tested. Hopefully, the Waymo Corporation has good insurance. Thousands more angry activists launched fireworks at police, threw furniture off overpasses at cop cars, pickaxed chunks of concrete off federal buildings to chuck at law enforcement, and generally made obnoxious nuisances of themselves.

For fairness.

It remained a mystery why the combatants proudly carried flags from their home countries while (allegedly) protesting anyone being deported back to those dangerous hellholes. If your homeland is a flaming trash pile worth fleeing, maybe don’t wave its flag like a tailgate banner while you riot to avoid going back. It sends mixed signals.

So what’s really going on? Let’s follow the money!

According to a recent New York Post story, one of the ‘LA protest’s’ leading organizers is an NGO called the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights (CHIRLA). The story reported (while hat-tipping DataRepublican—go, girl!) that —get this— CHIRLA’s annual $34 million budget is nearly completely funded by … the State of California.

Congratulations, Californians! Your tax dollars, hard at work.

And because insanity is a growth industry, California increased CHIRLA’s budget by $12 million this year — a 50% raise for lighting things on fire. Between October 2021 and September 2024, CHIRLA also got about half a million federal tax dollars from DHS grants, which thank DOGE were cut off in March (and about $100K was clawed back).

It’s like giving a kid matches for his birthday, then paying the fire department overtime when he torches the garage.

Look, I don’t want to restate the obvious here, but how on Earth does it make sense to pay radical protest groups to put on protests and then pay for the law enforcement response to, and subsequent healthcare from, the same riots those activists were paid to stage?

More broadly: Americans are paying NGOs to settle illegals here, then paying ICE to deport them. Make it make sense.

The Post’s story also found groups funded by the Chinese CCP and locally-grown communists. Weird. It’s kind of like a progressive “all hands on deck” moment. Besides organic outrage over deporting a few criminal illegal aliens, what else could be behind this?

Just over a week ago —days before the LA riots began— an immigration story quietly broke all over the world, especially in countries supplying most of our illegals. You never heard about a teeny-tiny provision buried in Trump’s Big Beautiful Bill, but the short paragraph made Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum denounce the United States in a fiery tirade that Evita Perón would have loved. She promptly shipped a team of diplomats to DC (with tacos), to lobby the Senate to stop the bill— a panicked response that the oddly named president never even tried during the tariffs crisis.

Days later, the riots started. What was in the bill that so inflamed Claudia’s Latin temper? Our useless corporate media has never mentioned it, and we’ll get back to that absurd silence soon, believe that.

Prepare for a little wonkiness. A couple weeks ago, Al Jazeera covered Sheinbaum’s temper tantrum in a story headlined, “Claudia Sheinbaum denounces proposed US remittance tax as ‘unacceptable.’”

Buried deep in Trump’s Big Beautiful Bill — in a footnote somewhere between fencing specs and visa quotas — was a real bombshell: a modest 5% tax on remittances, i.e., money shipped out of the U.S. by non-citizens.

In political terms, it was like taxing oxygen.

It was the end of Del Mundo! Denouncing the proposed remittance tax as “unacceptable,” Sheinbaum yelled, "If necessary, we will mobilize! We do not want taxes on remittances from our compatriots!” ...

Expansión reported that remittances from the United States are one of Mexico’s largest single income sources, more than cars, food, or oil. In 2024, the total swelled to $64.7 billion— 3.5% of Mexico’s entire GDP. That’s just Mexico. Remittances to India exceed $165 billion.




... The most delicious irony is that many of the same countries throwing tantrums over Trump’s modest 5% remittance tax already tax those same remittances when they arrive. Mexico, for instance, has a value-added tax (VAT) system that snags remittance spending on entry with taxes up to 16%, plus banking fees and local transfer taxes on top of that.

In other words, Mexico taxes the money and calls it “revenue.” But if the U.S. dares take a slice before it leaves the country, suddenly, it’s a crime against humanity.

So to recap: we’re paying migrants to settle here, paying NGOs to rally them into street warfare, paying the cops to clean up the mess, paying hospitals for protest-related injuries, and we’ve been giving their home countries hundreds of billions in tax-free remittances to boot.

But sure, let’s keep pretending this is a completely organic, grassroots movement about “human rights,” and not about billion-dollar paychecks.

Why can’t corporate media connect the dots that a whiskey-soaked barstool philosopher could trace with a crayon? Why does the New York Times play as dumb as a 5th grader at a carnival ring-toss booth?

The reason is that remittances are one of the biggest grifts on Earth.

Democrats in “sanctuary” strongholds rely on mass immigration for demographic leverage and a ready supply of NGO brown shirts. The unspoken deal is simple: we’ll let you stay and work under the table, you keep wiring money home, and we’ll all pretend it’s compassion. Meanwhile, the cartels rake it in on both ends—first smuggling bodies, then skimming their remittances through extortion and “protection” rackets that prey on families back home.

Foreign governments love it. Remittances are a direct revenue source and a pressure-release valve for their own broken economies. Let the poor leave, collect free income from the U.S., and avoid the messy business of governance. No need to build infrastructure, fix education, or fund healthcare— American suckers will do it for you.

Every dollar sent abroad is a dollar not spent in the U.S.— not invested in local businesses, not saved in American banks, not taxed to fix our potholes. We are underwriting failed socialist states by exporting our own paychecks.

You might think 5% is nothing, less than sales tax. And you might think foreign governments wouldn’t care, since the money flows directly to their “poorest” families. You might wonder why remittance taxes instantly became the Mexican presidentress’ top priority.

The answer is because it’s not really charity. It’s revenue. Those remittances get spent, deposited, and heavily taxed— both on arrival and when what’s left gets spent. They prop up shaky banking systems, inflate local currencies, and keep whole rural economies just stable enough to avoid revolt. In many countries, they’re a top national income source — bigger than tourism, oil, or trade surpluses. Mexico alone pulled in nearly $65 billion last year, more than it made exporting cars or oil.

So when Trump proposes to shave a tiny sliver off the top, Claudia’s concern is not really about fairness — she’s fretting about a direct threat to the global grift’s business model. That 5% isn’t a tax on American kindness. It’s a toll booth on a multi-billion dollar pipeline that corrupt elites and cartels count on to keep the scam running.

Corporate media are AWOL because they know this is another losing issue for progressives. The optics are awful: violent protests, foreign flags, taxpayer-funded NGOs organizing chaos, and now a foreign president openly meddling in U.S. legislation— all to keep the remittance gravy train flowing.

So instead, reporters play dumb, wail about hurting the American economy, and pretend the burning Waymos are just a spontaneous burst of humanitarian passion — not a multinational racket with billions at stake. But we see them.

How awful is corporate media? You literally can’t make this stuff up. One ABC reporter actually told viewers that it might be “unwise to send in law enforcement” because the L.A. riots were “just a bunch of people having fun watching cars burn.” That’s a direct quote, not satire. It came from an actual newscast aired on a major American network while fires lit up the sky behind them.

Amazingly mayor Karen bass acknowledged that the protests are not peaceful.