When pressed on Fox News’ Sunday Morning Futures, Mexico’s ambassador to the United States, Esteban Moctezuma Barragán, tried to paint the new allegations as overblown while insisting his government remains a partner in combating cartels and managing migration. The segment followed explosive claims from investigative author Peter Schweizer that Mexico has gone beyond consular assistance and is actively coordinating anti-ICE protests and political agitation inside U.S. cities.
Schweizer didn’t mince words, calling the phenomenon “weaponized immigration” and arguing that Mexico’s sprawling consular network and migrant outreach initiatives have been repurposed to exert political influence in the United States. He singled out Mexico-backed media efforts like TV Migrante and alleged coordination with activist groups that encouraged protests after immigration enforcement actions. Those are serious charges that should make every American who values sovereignty sit up and pay attention.
The author also cites specific examples — meetings at consulates where activists and officials reportedly discussed flipping American states, distribution of Mexican government-approved textbooks that portray U.S. history in a hostile light, and “migrant legislators” who act like political operatives on U.S. soil. If true, these aren’t routine consular services; they’re political operations disguised as outreach, and they violate the spirit, if not the letter, of diplomatic norms. Americans deserve transparency, not soft-power subversion.
Ambassador Moctezuma answered with the predictable platitudes about cooperation, respect for sovereignty, and a shared interest in cracking down on cartels — talking points that sound fine until you remember words are cheap. The American people have a right to ask whether diplomatic missions are crossing the line into domestic political activity, and whether our government will protect federal agents who are simply enforcing the law. The ambassador’s reassurances cannot substitute for concrete, verifiable answers.
Conservative investigators like Schweizer have urged a zero-tolerance policy: if foreign diplomatic staff are organizing or praising anti-ICE protests or otherwise meddling in U.S. political life, the logical responses are visa revocations and expulsions. That’s not warmongering — it’s common-sense diplomacy. Sovereignty means enforcing rules when they’re broken, not shrugging and hoping the problem goes away.
Beyond politics, there’s a cold calculation here: remittances from the U.S. to Mexico amount to tens of billions of dollars, giving Mexican authorities economic leverage they could exploit for political gain if they chose to. That economic reality makes Schweitzer’s warnings about influence far from hypothetical — it’s a reminder that financial ties can bend political incentives unless Washington acts in its own national interest. Americans should demand that their leaders treat these levers with the seriousness they deserve.
Washington should stop acting timid. If evidence shows consular staff crossed the line into organizing or directing protests on U.S. soil, immediate diplomatic consequences must follow — from visa revocations to the expulsion of offending officials. Our law enforcement officers need protection from foreign-backed agitation, and our electoral system must not be a playground for foreign influence operations. The era of soft-pedaling foreign interference must end.
Patriots who care about rule of law and secure borders shouldn’t be placated with vague promises of cooperation while their sovereignty is quietly eroded. Demand a thorough, public investigation, insist on accountability, and make clear that America will not tolerate diplomatic overreach dressed up as consular outreach. This fight isn’t partisan — it’s about preserving a nation where laws, not foreign agendas, decide our future.
