logo
Border Patrol morale goes through the roof, 'dramatically' changed under Trump administration

Border Patrol morale goes through the roof, 'dramatically' changed under Trump administration

Fox News2 days ago
TUCSON SECTOR, ARIZONA– Under the bright sun, Border Patrol agents Daniel Hernandez and Teresa Fast glisten with sweat as they stride along the rusted fence separating the United States and Mexico. They revealed the reality of what life is like working at the border.
"A few months ago, before the election and before the previous administration, we were mostly doing processing of detained individuals," Hernandez told Fox News Digital. "That's an administrative duty that is part of our job, but it used to be a small sliver of it, [and we were] doing a large portion of that. Now it's inverse."
"Now we're doing small slivers of the processing, and we're doing the bulk of patrolling duties. Most of our agents are out there patrolling."
"We're historically one of the busiest sectors," the homeland security agent said. "We're at [a] 91% reduction [rate] over last year's amounts, but that's because we're out here every single day."
"If we were to take our foot off the gas and just assume the border's secure, then we would lose what we had gained. So every single day we have to invest in patrolling," he added.
According to the White House, as of April 28 of this year, illegal border crossings "are down by 95%" when compared to numbers under the Biden administration.
Previously restrained by budget cuts that impeded the completion of their duties, the border patrol agents communicated a renewed sense of faith for increasing safety for all involved.
"People are less inclined to climb a fence of this magnitude," Hernandez relayed while pointing to the southern border wall. "If they do, they have to go up high, then our cameras or our agents can spot them if they go up high. So that's the advantage of having robust infrastructure on the border that buys us time to get here."
"Smugglers will try anything. It's shocking that they will risk somebody's life by getting them up on a really small, handmade ladder," he continued. "[It's one] way somebody might try to defeat the border wall… and people will always try."
The empathy portrayed by agents when considering the human element of deportations and illegal crossings is an echoed sentiment among Tucson sector Border Patrol chief, Sean McGoffin.
"The cartels treat people as a commodity rather than as human beings. It's up to us to reintroduce that element of humanity and make sure we're saving the lives of those individuals the cartels leave behind. One of the great things we do in the Border Patrol — though it's rarely talked about — is the rescues we perform each and every day," the CBP Chief told Fox News Digital.CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
Fast added, "The men and the women of the patrol are really what makes it run. That's what keeps our country safer, the people who are giving up those games with their kids and their [holidays] and working night shifts – that's what keeps our country safe. That's really what it is, the men and the women of the border patrol."
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Taxes on Social Security benefits were not eliminated despite what you've heard
Taxes on Social Security benefits were not eliminated despite what you've heard

Yahoo

time14 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Taxes on Social Security benefits were not eliminated despite what you've heard

All the misleading buzz about Social Security and tax cuts for seniors in "One Big Beautiful Bill" foreshadows one ugly scene after another at tax preparation offices next year. It's not going to be pretty when many ill-informed retirees file 2025 tax returns. "What do you mean I'm paying taxes on my Social Security benefits?" some will no doubt ask. Already in July, I've spotted social media posts by tax professionals who dread the day when they will have to say "welcome to reality" to clients. "'Yes, your Social Security is still 85% taxable. Yes, I know that's what Trump's still saying. But pay attention to what he signed, not what he says,' he yelled for the 792,682,314th time into the void," posted Adam Markowitz, an enrolled agent in Florida, on X. What's sparking confusion for retirees about taxes The White House proclaimed, once again, "NO tax on Social Security" on July 4 when President Donald Trump signed what he calls "The One Big Beautiful Bill" into law. It's not an accurate statement. He also sent a mass email on July 12 making the same point. The Social Security Administration sent a gushy, questionable email July 4 to millions of people collecting Social Security benefits and others. Soon afterward, I heard from some retirees who couldn't believe how a federal agency was doing a hard sell about the supposed benefits and creating even more confusion. "The bill ensures that nearly 90% of Social Security beneficiaries will no longer pay federal income taxes on their benefits, providing meaningful and immediate relief to seniors who have spent a lifetime contributing to our nation's economy," Social Security stated in its email and online. Ninety percent, really? More on that one later. At one point, the email seemed to suggest that retirees were getting two tax breaks. "The new law includes a provision that eliminates federal income taxes on Social Security benefits for most beneficiaries, providing relief to individuals and couples. Additionally, it provides an enhanced deduction for taxpayers aged 65 and older, ensuring that retirees can keep more of what they have earned," according to a copy of the email forwarded to me. Additionally? There is no "additionally." The tax cut is an enhanced deduction for taxpayers aged 65 and older. That's it. The law doesn't eliminate the risk that some will pay taxes on their Social Security benefits. Trump taxes in 2025: Gamblers will pay more taxes in 2026 and beyond when Trump's 'Big, Beautiful Bill' hits The Social Security blog online now refers to a correction without saying what was wrong. "Correction Notice: This blog was updated on July 7, 2025. The second sentence of the fourth paragraph originally read, 'Additionally, it provides an enhanced deduction for taxpayers aged 65 and older, ensuring that retirees can keep more of what they have earned.'' The word "additionally" is no longer in the copy. Instead, the paragraph in the online blog at now reads: "The new law includes a provision that eliminates federal income taxes on Social Security benefits for most beneficiaries, providing relief to individuals and couples. It does so by providing an enhanced deduction for taxpayers aged 65 and older, ensuring that retirees can keep more of what they earned." Clear as mud, as one of my relatives might say. How does the 'senior bonus' work? A new, temporary "senior bonus" deduction of up to $6,000 will apply to taxpayers who are 65 and older in 2025, 2026, 2027 and 2028. It ends after that without congressional action. Tax professionals call this a "special personal exemption" that aims to reduce the tax bill for many seniors. In general, seniors with high incomes would not qualify; lower income seniors who do not pay taxes would not benefit, either. "As a deduction and not a refundable credit, it will not help seniors who already owe no income taxes," said Mark Luscombe, principal analyst for Wolters Kluwer Tax & Accounting in Riverwoods, Illinois. Luscombe explained that higher income seniors receive a smaller tax break or no tax break because the deduction starts phasing out for those with a modified adjusted gross income of $75,000 for singles and $150,000 for joint filers. And, yes, there are plenty of other rules but, oddly enough, you do not have to be receiving Social Security benefits each month to qualify. It will not pay to be young — no matter what your income. Taxpayers who are 62, 63 and 64 at the end of a tax year do not qualify for the "senior bonus" deduction. They could still pay income taxes on Social Security benefits, if they're collecting benefits and hit certain income thresholds, without any offsetting bonus deduction. Here's a breakdown of some more rules that you'll need to know when filing a 2025 return: Some married couples can get a better deal: If both spouses are 65 or older, each could receive up to $6,000 or up to $12,000 total for the senior bonus deduction in a given tax year. Married couples face another rule: Married couples must file jointly to claim the senior deduction. If you opt for "married filing separately," you will not qualify for the senior bonus deduction, according to Tom O'Saben, enrolled agent and director of tax content and government relations for the National Association of Tax Professionals. Social Security number required: To claim the deduction, the senior must have a valid Social Security number. Those with higher incomes face limits: The tax break would phase out entirely for single taxpayers 65 and older with a modified adjusted gross income at $175,000. It would phase out entirely for married taxpayers 65 and older with a modified adjusted gross income at $250,000. 6% is the phase out number. When your income climbs above the threshold, the deduction phases out at a rate of 6%. The National Association of Tax Professionals, which has 23,000 members, offered an example for a 70-year-old retiree who is single and has a modified adjusted gross income (MAGI) of $90,000. In this example, $15,000 of MAGI exceeds the $75,000 threshold for a single tax filer. Take out your calculator and multiple $15,000 by 6% to hit $900. The maximum $6,000 senior bonus deduction is then reduced by $900 in this example to reach a senior deduction of $5,100. Tax relief for parents: How the Child and Dependent Care Credit can cut summer camp costs in 2025 Taxes on Social Security were never eliminated Believe me, you're not doing your friends any favors now by insisting that there are no taxes on Social Security benefits. Some people still need to withhold taxes on their Social Security benefits, if they have other significant sources of income. At no point did the House bill or Senate version, which was later passed by the House and signed into law by Trump, ever include a provision to eliminate the tax on Social Security or provide a deduction for Social Security income, according to a summary of the massive reconciliation bill provided by Wolters Kluwer, an information services company. Trump famously proposed making Social Security income tax-free during his 2024 campaign. But such a change could not be part of the budget reconciliation process. One provision of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 prohibits Senate reconciliation bills from including any measure that changes Social Security benefits or taxes. "It's fair to frame this new deduction as an attempt to fulfill the spirit of the president's campaign proposal consistent with the limits imposed in the reconciliation process," said Garrett Watson, director of policy analysis at the nonpartisan Tax Foundation. "But selling this politically as exempting Social Security from income tax is not accurate and will confuse or upset the seniors who end up paying tax on some benefits," Watson said. The senior bonus deduction, Watson points out, applies to any source of taxable income that a taxpayer who is 65 or older has and may not necessarily eliminate all tax on Social Security benefits. Social Security benefits began being taxed at the federal level in 1984 to shore up the Social Security trust fund, which was facing insolvency. At best, the new tax break means many seniors will save some money on taxes over four years. "Despite the SSA claims, most would see their income taxes on Social Security benefits reduced, not eliminated," wrote Howard Gleckman, a senior fellow at the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center. In an online report July 9, Gleckman wrote that the biggest beneficiaries are seniors making between about $80,000 and $130,000. The senior bonus deduction would for that group would amount to an average tax cut of about $1,100 or roughly 1% of their after-tax income, he said. The tax deduction of up to $6,000 would benefit fewer than half of older adults, according to the Tax Policy Center estimates. How much a senior who qualifies for the "senior bonus" will save on taxes will depend on their taxable income, which determines your marginal tax rate. At a 12% marginal tax rate, for example, the $6,000 deduction for a single taxpayer who is 65 or older would result in $720 in tax savings, according to Watson. For a single taxpayer, the 12% tax rate applied on taxable income from $11,926 through $48,475 in 2025. Annual inflation adjustments can be made to marginal tax brackets. Hype, complexities and more can get your head spinning All this begs the question: How can Trump say there will be no taxes on Social Security benefits? Well, retirees will need to treat this one as one of those Trumpisms where, maybe, you need to study the fine print first. "The president often seems to try to put as positive a spin as possible on an issue without being totally consistent with the facts," Luscombe said. The 90% number used in the email sent by the Social Security Administration appears to track a 90% figure used by the White House. It is misleading. Many people did not have to pay taxes on Social Security benefits based on their income before the mega tax bill was signed into law July 4. About 40% of people who get Social Security currently pay income taxes on their benefits, according to an earlier report issued by the Social Security Administration in 2025. Other estimates, though, suggest that a bit more than 50% currently pay taxes. The Tax Foundation did not estimate the portion of seniors who would not pay tax on benefits under the new deduction. But noted that roughly half of all Social Security beneficiaries did not pay federal income tax on their Social Security benefits before the new tax law. Gleckman, at the Tax Policy Center, told the Detroit Free Press — part of the USA TODAY Network — that the 90% figure being used by the Social Security Administration isn't close to reality. In his online blog, Gleckman said the administration apparently came up with its 90% estimate by "assuming all tax deductions, including the new senior deduction, are used only to reduce Social Security benefit taxes." "But, of course, older adults pay taxes on all their taxable income, including from sources other than Social Security," Gleckman wrote. The Tax Policy Center's estimate is that about half of all recipients will pay at least some income taxes on their Social Security benefits, Gleckman wrote. "That is, they face higher tax liability than they would if benefits were not taxable. "The Social Security system is complicated, and, in many ways, its complexity is terrifying for older adults, many of whom rely on its benefits to pay living expenses in old age. The latest SSA communication does not help and indeed may make matters worse," Gleckman wrote. How Social Security benefits are taxed will remain a complex headache for many people aged 62 and up. Based on Social Security data, nearly 23% of men and 24.5% of women who claimed retirement benefits in 2022 were age 62. The earliest age that you can claim Social Security retirement benefits is 62. By collecting as early as possible, though, you'd receive a reduced monthly retirement benefit that is cut by a small percentage for each month before your full retirement age. The full retirement age is 67 now for those born in 1960 and after. For those born earlier, the full retirement age varies and is less than 67 based on when you were born. How Social Security benefits are taxed Unfortunately, it doesn't take much extra income to get hit with some taxes because income thresholds that trigger the tax on Social Security benefits do not adjust for inflation. For single filers, the threshold for paying taxes on up to 50% of Social Security benefits applies when your combined income is between $25,000 and $34,000 a year. Once the combined income is higher, up to 85% of benefits may be taxable. Couples filing a joint return face taxes on up to 50% of their Social Security benefits if their combined income is between $32,000 and $44,000. If the couple's combined income is higher than that, up to 85% of benefits would be taxable. Combined income is your adjusted gross income, plus nontaxable interest, such as interest on certain bonds, plus half of your Social Security benefits received that year. As a result, someone who is working while collecting Social Security benefits would need to take their earnings from a job into account. The same's true for someone who is retired and taking taxable withdrawals from traditional 401(k) plans. All that tax complexity isn't going to vanish. O'Saben, of the National Association of Tax Professionals, said he's frustrated by how the senior bonus deduction is being marketed. He heard a news story on the radio that implied that Social Security benefits were no longer taxable and he found himself yelling at the radio while driving. "There is no provision making Social Security benefits tax free," O'Saben said. Contact personal finance columnist Susan Tompor: stompor@ Follow her on X @tompor. This article originally appeared on Detroit Free Press: Trump didn't kill taxes on Social Security, despite what you've heard Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

Cook County Board President Toni Preckwinkle endorses state Sen. Robert Peters for Congress
Cook County Board President Toni Preckwinkle endorses state Sen. Robert Peters for Congress

Yahoo

time14 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Cook County Board President Toni Preckwinkle endorses state Sen. Robert Peters for Congress

Cook County Democrats last week declined to pick official favorites in the crowded primary fields ahead of next year's congressional primaries, but the party's chair is backing a protégé in the race to replace U.S. Rep Robin Kelly in the district that stretches from the South Side to central Illinois. Cook County Board President Toni Preckwinkle on Monday announced her support for state Sen. Robert Peters, a South Side progressive, in the March Democratic primary to replace Kelly, who is forgoing a reelection bid for the 2nd Congressional District seat to run for the U.S. Senate. Peters worked as an activist on economic and criminal justice issues with both Preckwinkle and another of her protégés, former Cook County State's Attorney Kim Foxx. Preckwinkle also backed Peters for an appointment to the Illinois Senate in 2019 to replace Kwame Raoul after Raoul's was elected the state's attorney general. Preckwinkle's endorsement comes as the potential entry of former U.S. Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. into the race could dramatically alter the landscape in the 2nd Congressional District primary. Preckwinkle described Peters in a statement Monday as one of her 'most trusted partners in the state legislature.' 'There is no stronger advocate for working people, for social justice and for economic fairness than Robert,' Preckwinkle said. 'I've watched him grow from a hard working young organizer, to an accomplished state legislator. All the while, he's never shied away from the tough conversations necessary to build the coalitions needed to win difficult fights.' Peters acknowledged the four-term County Board president as 'a mentor for me throughout my time in organizing and in public service.' 'I know she will continue to be a trusted ally and coach as I campaign all throughout the 2nd District, and as I take on the big fights in Congress, like fighting cuts to Medicaid, (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) benefits and the (Department of Veterans Affairs),' Peters said in a statement. Peters, who already has a big-name endorsement from U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, has an early fundraising advantage over six other Democrats who've officially declared their candidacies, a group that doesn't include Jackson. From entering the race in mid-May through the end of June, Peters raised more than $415,000, and he entered July with nearly $375,000 in his campaign account, Federal Election Commission records show. That's more than all the other candidates combined, though two of them, Cook County Commissioner Donna Miller of Lynwood and state Sen. Willie Preston of Chicago, entered the race after the end of the previous reporting period. After forming an exploratory committee, Jackson told the Tribune last week that it's his 'intention to secure a place on the ballot' in the primary for his former seat in Congress. Jackson resigned in 2012 amid a corruption probe and later went to federal prison for conspiring to defraud his reelection campaign of about $750,000 that was used to pay for personal expenses such as home renovations, two mounted elk heads and high-end merchandise, including mink clothes and a Michael Jackson autographed guitar. Jackson's family has rallied behind Preckwinkle in the past. When she was overwhelmingly defeated in her 2019 bid for mayor, Jackson's father, civil rights icon the Rev. Jesse Jackson, hosted her and Mayor-elect Lori Lightfoot at his Rainbow/PUSH Coalition and told those in attendance not to abandon Preckwinkle in her moment of defeat. He enjoined the crowd to repeat after him: 'Toni is the president of the Cook County Board and of all Democrats. We shall fight to maintain her gain.' The 2nd Congressional District stretches south along the Lake Michigan shoreline and the Indiana border from 43rd Street in Chicago to Danville. Major party candidates for the March 17 primaries can begin collecting petition signatures on Aug. 5 to get their names on the ballot. Solve the daily Crossword

Second adult charged in connection to abduction of Jamal White, 7
Second adult charged in connection to abduction of Jamal White, 7

Yahoo

time14 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Second adult charged in connection to abduction of Jamal White, 7

A second adult faces kidnapping charges in the July 11 abduction of seven-year-old Jamal White. Jamal, known as Baby J, was abducted at gunpoint from outside his father's house. He was recovered the following day, less than 24 hours after Milwaukee Police Department designated him as "critically missing" and an Amber alert was issued. Corey Williams, 25, was arrested on July 13 from the house where Jamal was found, and criminal charges were filed against him the next day. On July 15, Fabian Johnson, 38, was arrested in connection with the abduction. Johnson was charged Sunday with being a party to the crime of kidnapping by forcibly seizing or confining another individual. According to a Milwaukee Police Department detective's interview with Williams quoted in criminal complaints filed against Johnson and Williams, the two men and an unnamed 14-year-old companion planned to rob Jamal's mother at gunpoint at her home. Williams said that both Johnson and the 14-year-old wore masks and brought guns, and that the three drove in a borrowed white Jeep. When they arrived at Jamal's mother's home and did not see her, the 14-year-old suggested that they try to rob Jamal's father at his home instead. When they arrived, they saw Jamal riding his bike outside the home. Williams noted in the interview that Jamal's father was also outside at that time. According to the complaint, Johnson and the 14-year-old left the Jeep carrying hand guns and ran at Jamal's father, who ran into the house. The 14-year-old then grabbed Jamal and took him into the Jeep. The group then drove to Williams' residence. Later that night, Williams recalled, Johnson called Jamal's mother and demanded $100,000 and jewelry in exchange for Jamal, offering to meet at a nearby park. According to Williams, Jamal's mother did not show up to the meeting. Once the men became aware of the Amber alert issued for Jamal, Johnson and the 14-year-old left the child with Williams at Williams' house. According to the complaint, Williams told the detective that there were conversations about whether Johnson or the 14-year-old should harm Jamal, but they ultimately decided not to. The charge against Johnson, a class C felony, is less severe than the charges that Williams faces. Williams was charged with being party to the crime of kidnapping, a class B felony, as well as being party to the crime of taking hostages. Williams was also charged with contributing to the delinquency of a child because of the 14-year-old's role in the kidnapping. According to online court records, Johnson was convicted on drug charges and possessing a firearm as a formerly convicted felon in four cases filed between 2006 and 2013. This article originally appeared on Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: Second adult charged in Jamal White kidnapping Solve the daily Crossword

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store