Like a bolt out of the blue, it looks like President Donald Trump may just have achieved the Holy Grail of the illegal immigration debate: cooperation from Mexico. In a move that has stunned the establishment media, the incoming Mexican government has agreed to hold South and Central American caravan migrants in Mexico until their U.S. asylum claims can be properly processed.

Is this the first step in curtailing the massive illegal entry problem at the southern border? Could this be a calculated spin job by the White House? Or is it a mixture of fact and fiction designed to become self-fulfilling?

As The Washington Post insists the “Remain in Mexico” plan is being supported by the newly elected Obrador government that is due to take power on December 1, CNN denies that any such deal is in place. The confusion and conflicting interpretations between two of the nation’s largest propaganda machines shows that cracks are forming in the previously united front.

What Mexico Says

Mexico’s next Interior Minister, Olga Sánchez Cordero, stated that:

“For now, we have agreed to this policy of Remain in Mexico … The medium- and long-term solution is that people don’t migrate. Mexico has open arms and everything, but imagine one caravan after another after another. That would also be a problem for us.”

Straight from the horse’s mouth. The Remain in Mexico deal works on the basis that all caravan members applying for asylum in the U.S. must do so from Mexican soil, thereby solving the problem of claimants disappearing into the vast U.S. and never turning up for appointed court dates.

President Trump outlined the proposal in a pair of tweets:

“Migrants at the Southern Border will not be allowed into the United States until their claims are individually approved in court. We only will allow those who come into our Country legally. Other than that our very strong policy is Catch and Detain. No “Releasing” into the U.S. … All will stay in Mexico. If for any reason it becomes necessary, we will CLOSE our Southern Border. There is no way that the United States will, after decades of abuse, put up with this costly and dangerous situation anymore!”

To add to the confusion, AP reports that Cordero now states there is no such deal. “There is no agreement of any sort between the incoming Mexican government and the U.S. government,” she said. Reuters has also published that the Mexican government has signed no such deal. So what gives?

For all of its bias and lunacy, it is highly unlikely that The Washington Post made up statements by incoming government ministers. What is more likely is that varying news agencies are asking different questions. An agreement (in the legal sense) between Mexico and America could only be signed by the actual government; with 6 days to go until Obrador takes up the mantle, it is too soon to announce that a deal is in place. Yet promises of intent by an incoming leader are neither unlawful nor rare. Could it be that this whole mess is due to lazy journalism and imprecise language?

A Growing Divide

It has become apparent is that left-leaning media giants are beginning to turn against each other. The Washington Post first reported this immigration control breakthrough on Saturday afternoon, but by Sunday morning, CNN was rebutting the claims.

CNN highlights that Olga Sánchez Cordero released a statement that in their opinion debunks WaPo’s stand: “Mexico’s next federal administration does not consider within its plans that Mexico assume the condition of ‘third secure country.’” Is CNN wilfully misrepresenting reality? Not being designated a “third secure country,” in no way suggests that Mexico is not willing to hold potential asylees on their home turf.

Either the Clinton News Network or WaPo editorial staff have failed to understand the intricacies of the arrangement, or they are engaged in a battle of lies and propaganda that can brook no success for the Trump administration. When two major media players who usually follow the same script end up going head to head, it is a split that can only grow.

Good for America?

Mexico’s agreement in keeping asylum seekers on their side of the border, if true, is not being granted as a favor to the U.S., but rather as a way of dealing with illegal immigration in their own country. The U.S. southern border is also the Mexican northern border; caravan after caravan of immigrants traipsing across their country is a bad situation with which some residents are already unhappy. Mexico can’t let these migrants starve, they can’t leave them unsheltered; this costs money and resources. Added to this the criminal element and terrorists who take advantage of vast crowds to cross borders unnoticed, stopping illegal immigration is becoming a high priority for Mexican national security.

And, of course, America benefits from having a partner willing to take some responsibility.

With little chance of getting into America, immigrants who are planning on making false asylum claims will think again before starting out on the long march. This is good for the U.S., it is good for Mexico, and most importantly, it is good for genuine asylum seekers who are not being pushed to the back of the line by those with no right or reason to be there.

Throw in the warring tribes of leftist media groups accusing one another of making false claims, and this is a pretty good day to be Donald J. Trump.