#TDS

Hey! NY Times – you need new editors

B27D9E23-440B-4D38-BDC2-51B2ABF97DEF.jpeg

Seriously NY Times. Just once. CM dares you. Write some balance on this debate about tracking undocumented kids? Where are these magical editors seeking to ensure “all the news that is fit to print”? Why not write the truth of “why” tracking migrant children is so hard? Everything bad doesn’t happen because of the Trump administration. CBS wrote in Feb 2016 (hint: Trump wasn’t president) the following,

Finding immigrant children with outstanding deportation orders is also complicated by the fact that they often are no longer at the addresses provided to the government…We are out looking,” Homan said. “But they are hard to find. A lot of these folks who don’t show up in court, we don’t know where they’re at.”

Yes, the truth isn’t that the immigration agencies don’t keep track of the kids, their often (illegal) immigrant families don’t want ICE to know where they are to prevent their own deportation so move around making them hard to track.

Then again if the NYT want to run the narrative that the Trump administration is a bunch of Nazis why not write that it is woefully incompetent in executing its draconian plans to systematically tag and terrorize children?

Oh, that is right the problem started in the Obama era with respect to this. Don’t let that fact distort yet another problem that needs fixing due to poorly laid out policy. Then again CNN was at it with its ideological twists only two days ago.

Or perhaps In Jan 2016 when WaPo noted, “The Office of Refugee Resettlement, an agency of the Department of Health and Human Services, failed to do proper background checks of adults who claimed the children…several Guatemalan teens were found in a dilapidated trailer park near Marion, Ohio, where they were being held captive in squalid conditions by traffickers and forced to work“. So slave labour to repay human traffickers? Let’s encourage more to attempt the crossing?

Yes, the system clearly needs to be changed but if you read the NYT or WaPo one would believe the entire problem has Trump’s finger prints all over it. Clearly not.

Democracy may die in darkness but stupidity is disinfected by sunlight.

Media treating Aretha Franklin without R-E-S-P-E-C-T

7CC6DA75-8DE5-4286-BD4C-AF53274F9F34.jpeg

Instead of remembering Aretha Franklin as one of the most amazing singing talents over several generations, The Daily Beast couldn’t help but use her death to take a potshot at Trump. Surely that news was as easily told during her life rather than using the opportunity of her death because the clickbait was juicier. Instead of listing the decades of amazing talent, it’s better to be grubs.

The article suggests she turned down an invite to his 2017 inauguration but happily sung for him multiple times at Trump venues over many years.

So what is the point? That Franklin was happy to make money from Trump when he was a celebrity but since she was a backer of the Hillary Clinton campaign that might have conflicted with her sense of party affiliation? Ahh, but no, the article confirms that Elton John refused to perform too! Take that you evil POTUS!

Sadly, even in the deep sorrow of Franklin’s passing, the media can’t help but use it to push a narrative of hate. Sorry, who is spreading division? How about honoring her legacy?Pretty sure her final words had zip to do with Trump.

As Aretha would have said “you better think, think, what you’re trying to do to me!

Pathetically Priceless

23D0E64E-5772-44ED-A813-527CAC4F5613.jpeg

Double standards are a strong feature of the liberal elites and Hollywood. Instead of living up to the Chanber of Commerce’s view that it does not remove stars over public backlash by citing  historical landmark status., when it comes to Trump all bets are off. While Bill Cosby, a convicted rapist, keeps his Hollywood star, Trump’s disturbing treatment of women (locker room talk and allegations of paying porn stars) is deemed a more heinous crime. Liberal logic.

The response to Trump

The resolution on which the West Hollywood City Council voted urged the removal of Mr. Trump’s star “due to his disturbing treatment of women and other actions that do not meet the shared values of the City of West Hollywood, the region, state, and country.

The Washington Time reports, “Among other things, the council’s staff report cites Mr. Trump’s border-security policies [an Obama era policy], his stance on climate change [Paris is non binding and the biggest polluters are doing next to nothing], the Vladimir Putin summit [since when did the Hollywood City Council enforce foreign policy?], and policies on transgenderism.”  

In effect, the Council endorses vandalism and destruction of public property.  Why not burn down Trump Tower or run an excavator  over the pristine greens of Mar-a-lago?

D4BFF0E4-3780-4C16-B6FA-D836E3BE36AA.jpeg

The Response to defacing of Bill Cosby’s star

In response, the Hollywood Chamber of Commerce released a statement politely asking fans not to deface anyone’s stars, no matter how many rapes they may be accused of: “When people are unhappy with one of our honorees, we would hope that they would project their anger in more positive ways. 

Probably stands to reason for an industry that turned a blind eye to decades of  #MeToo antics because it self-served their careers would vote for someone that has outed them for the blatant hypocrites they are. Bill Cosby’s star will likely be defended with the fervor of the NYT backing Sarah Jeong. Why not replace Trump’s star for Jeong? Strike will the pick axe is hot!

It is just a star but symbolic of the radical left’s standards that it’s the side that matters, not the principle. We should be happy that the left champion victories like this. Ever more sanctimonious preaching of the highest moral standards to the masses who already have such low opinions of them most are suffering from vertigo – remember this?

Trump Derangement Syndrome is a national health crisis. Perhaps POTUS should direct billions to help fund a cure. Otherwise poor old taxpayers will need to fork out for even more property damage.

High Time The NY Times believed or changed its own self-prescribed S&E code

5D09A335-3C02-4A34-96B5-D4AC6C587448.jpeg

Integrity is a must in journalism. Rarely do we see it. It seems that the white hating “fab new editor” Sarah Jeong also hates men and cops. If we forgive her hatred because others baited such that she was just giving it back, is there any evidence police mistreated her? Could it be a question of pulling her over for a traffic violation that they were doing their job, not deserved of “f*ck the police.” ?

44740AE6-D60D-4E2A-9384-A2F544A4D921.png

Although not on Jeong’s watch, isn’t the hypocrisy telling? Several weeks before the Putin-Trump summit in Helsinki the NYT was championing LGBT Pride Week. Post the summit, the paper proudly displayed a homophobic cartoon to disparage the two presidents. How is it that the champions of identity politics can’t even get their own self determined playing field equal?

In terms of integrity, fairness and truth the paper fails on all counts. Let’s see for ourselves. A quick referral to The NY Times own Standards & Ethics page we find:

Integrity

For more than a century, men and women of The Times have jealously guarded the paper’s integrity. Whatever else we contribute, our first duty is to make sure the integrity of The Times is not blemished during our stewardship.  At a time of growing and even justified public suspicion about the impartiality, accuracy and integrity of some journalists and some journalism, it is imperative that The Times and its staff maintain the highest possible standards to insure that we do nothing that might erode readers’ faith and confidence in our news columns. This means that the journalism we practice daily must be beyond reproach.

Under Fairness it prescribes:

The goal of The New York Times is to cover the news as impartially as possible — “without fear or favor,” in the words of Adolph Ochs, our patriarch — and to treat readers, news sources, advertisers and others fairly and openly, and to be seen to be doing so. The reputation of The Times rests upon such perceptions, and so do the professional reputations of its staff members. Thus The Times and members of its news department and editorial page staff share an interest in avoiding conflicts of interest or an appearance of a conflict.

And Truth

As journalists we treat our readers, viewers, listeners and online users as fairly and openly as possible. Whatever the medium, we tell our audiences the complete, unvarnished truth as best we can learn it. We correct our errors explicitly as soon as we become aware of them. We do not wait for someone to request a correction. We publish corrections in a prominent and consistent location or broadcast time slot. Staff members who plagiarize or who knowingly or recklessly provide false information for publication betray our fundamental pact with our readers. We do not tolerate such behavior.

As CM mentioned yesterday, there is no call for a boycott of the NYT or a movement to fire Sarah Jeong. CM wants these people at the NYT to walk the talk. If there is a code that the paper lives and dies by, stand by it or change it to reflect the unhinged nature the once reputable paper has become. Once again free markets will ultimately decide the paper’s fate. If it’s subscriber ranks swell then all power to it reading the mood of the public. Not even the return of the remains of gallant Korean War veterans who fought for their freedom remains worthy front page news. No just more anti-Trump noise.

The irony is that all the Jeong saga has exposed is that standards only apply conditionally. Just like those Hollywood actors who threatened to leave the US if Trump was elected. Pretty much all of them are still here.

The NY Times no longer hides the fact that it breaches all of it’s own self-imposed governance. That racism can be defended (even if it is not condoned) and because the paper is  so proud of its new hire it publicly announced an apology on Jeong’s behalf. Oh the sincerity! Surely if she is sorry for her racist outbursts, she could openly apologize herself? Perhaps the S&E code is still in transit to her home in Portland!

Imagine if the police decided to deprioritise a distress call from Jeong? It is highly likely they wouldn’t. There is a difference in those who put their lives on the line and a Harvard trust-fund baby that tweets from the safety of the very security those she accuses provide her.

Senate Democrats take up the fight against the nomination of “XX”

0D16B5F7-6B08-4D1C-A333-05154911DE8B.jpeg

What planet are these people on? Without the pick having even been announced, “XX” was deemed to be sufficient enough for Senate Democrats to launch a campaign and fire up the Women’s March group to commit exactly the same mistake. Trump Derangement Syndrome has hit such epic heights that carelessness seems to be a chronic side effect. Not one person proof-read the document prior to the release? One could almost make the case that their hatred and inability to have a sane conversation about any topic such that even if a clone of Obama appointee Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor was nominated they would howl in protest. No wonder the #WalkAway movement is gaining momentum. A party that stands for such flimsy principles will fall for anything.

SC nominees have generally been selected by sitting presidents (no matter how much advice they may have received in making the choice). It is up to the Senate to confirm it. In a democracy if the yea’s beat the nay’s it is pushed ahead. Simple. Could the Democrats truly admit they favour SC justices that prioritize conservative values? Of course not. In principle, SC justices are supposed to be impartial and interpret the constitution. In practice it is not always a safe bet to say personal biases do not come out. We need only look at Sotomayor’s responses to the Masterpiece Cakeshop case to show how she was wilfully criticising the law and interpreting the way she wanted it to be rather rather than defend it for what it is. No doubt one could find evidence to suggest that conservative SCJs have shown personal leanings in the past. In any event, it is not up to the SC to change laws. That is the job of the Hill. It is up to voters to put in those politicians they believe will support their values and change laws to right what they see as wrong.

CM probably has as much read through on SC nominee Brett Kavanaugh as 99.9% of the population i.e. next to none. Yet the expert commentary is everywhere on why every congressman and woman needs to reject this nomination. So unhinged has the left become that the poor kids being stripped from mothers at the border has become seemingly yesterday’s news. If it wasn’t Kavanaugh the identical verbatim would have been spewed at any other nominee set forward. All of them must have been carbon copied. How soon the TDS switches gears from one outrage to the next. This is the type of double standard that infuriates the masses. After the SCJ appointment, what next?

If the Democrats truly have a hope of winning the mid-terms or 2020, they aren’t learning any of the lessons that led to the loss in 2016. The majority of people don’t want to be harassed, screamed at or labeled bigots and racists for holding even uncontroversial personal beliefs. The perpetual outrage is driving normal people to turn off the white noise. Maybe parents want to watch a Disney movie with their kids without having to make their way around an anti-Trump picket march much less be subjected to reviews about Dumbo being safe for kids for not containing racist elements. What on earth would possess Vice Magazine to think that it did?

Democrats alienating GOP voters is a given – after all they are deplorable. Yet for more centrist leaning Democrats, the rattlesnake snapping tail of its left must be causing consternation for a growing number of supporters about whether the party embodies any of the reasons they back it in the first place. The infighting is becoming all too self-evident.

Just think of 28-yo Socialist Democrat Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in NY deposing an incumbent Democrat Joe Crowley. She turned on Senator Kirsten Gillibrand on her resounding  nomination win saying, “Unsurprising, but disappointing that @SenGillibrand didn’t even bother to talk to nor consider me before endorsing…You‘d think a progressive leader would at least be interested in how a no-corporate money Bronx Latina triggered the 1st NY-14 primary in 14 years on prog issues.” yet Gillibrand tweeted about Kavanaugh, “President Trump just announced Brett Kavanaugh as his nominee to the Supreme Court. One thing’s already clear from his record: He can’t be trusted to safeguard rights for women, workers or to end the flow of corporate money to campaigns.It is comical.

CM has said repeatedly til blue in the face that the best thing about a Trump win in 2016 is that it has woken people up to how much the vote counts. It doesn’t matter how racist, sexist, nationalist, disgusting or bigoted some may find him or his supporters, the reality is that decades of neglect by both parties has led to his creation. In spite of all the negative media calling into question his intelligence he is still the president and he is likely to get his SCJ picked. Doesn’t sound that incompetent? His opponent had the entire MSM on board, happily hid the fact she had the questions ahead of the debate, hijacked her own party, stole a nomination, buried evidence against her, financed a fake dossier, weaponised the FBI, had her hubby have a chance meeting on a tarmac with the AG ahead of the verdict on her emails and treated the election as a coronation and still lost. Incompetence? If it means enough to a majority of Americans they can exercise their opinions democratically.

If enough people detest his presidency they can cut him off at the knees by restricting his ability to govern at the mid terms and turf him out in 2020. They don’t need to protest on the streets or shout the average punter down. People get the issues. It is on a 24-7 news cycle. They want to vote in peace.

Ironically the Democrats only help him achieve his cause. Some say the mainstream media gave him a $5bn free media campaign in the lead up to the election. One would imagine he gets $10bn in free media every six months now – his tweets are global and when a London Mayor allows a Trump baby balloon to fly around London when POTUS visits only adds to how pathetic the grandstanding has got. A bigger reflection on the juvenile standards of the left than easily winning debates with reason, data and logic.

His defeat is a tragically simple affair – stop giving him hot air and he’ll plummet to earth. Imagine how many XXXX’s Democrats could give to the deplorables then. Sadly Trump is too good for ratings!

Surely voters can determine if tax returns matter to them

130692B1-30AA-49E9-8068-D7BD26A4E8DF.jpeg

Wow. How to alienate more voters across the country. Come up with new ways to fuel TDS. Hillary Clinton won the state of RI with 55.4% of the vote vs 39.8% for Trump in 2016. So a safe Dem seat. Presumably the idea is to get more states to follow RI’s suit. Surely voters can decide for themselves whether they regard his tax returns as a “must reveal” to the public. If they do think it’s an issue they’ll vote for anyone but him. Many public servants in RI would rather their gov’t focus on righting the 40% cuts to their pensions. CM is surprised WHO hasn’t issued a global epidemic warning for TDS.

No doubt liberal heads will explode at the upcoming SCOTUS pick. Even before anyone has been cast the person is already being painted a bigoted racist white supremacist. CM thinks even if Trump picked a Dem’s dream for the role they’d find a way to disparage that individual. RI is taking voters for mugs. They can decide on what matters to them by themselves. Not be dictated to by a state government being petty based on its own deeply rooted political biases. So much for democracy. Banning a sitting president from being on the ballot. The question is why has it taken 500+ days to come up with this plan?

ICE – the facts

ICE.png

In yesterday’s piece, Child Abuse – the shocking stats, some decided to launch expletive laden criticism on the lack of discourse on the US Immigration & Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) treatment of children at the Mexican border, the inference that CM was turning a blind eye to the beastly Trump administration in reporting the extent of child abuse. First, the politicization of children is abhorrent. Where were the media when these same supposed crimes of removing children from (supposed) parent/guardians was occurring since 2013? Reading through the ICE end of year report of 2017 we let the stats speak for themselves. Forgive the preamble.

Recall the one-sided media coverage of the lifeless body of 3yo Syrian boy Aylan Kurdi on the shores of Turkey. Yet the facts were clear – he had not been in any danger. The family had been safe in Turkey for 3 years. His father was trying to make his way to Germany for dental surgery. Aylan’s parent chose to risk his son with no life jacket to make a hazardous trip on an overcrowded boat to seek selfish opportunism. Is it up to the West to take responsibility for the individual choices of people who are not at risk of war zones? Yet the media still used the image to show how callous we were to allow this.

It was only a few weeks ago that Time magazine posted a photo-shopped image of a crying little girl looking up at POTUS. Despite a tongue-bitten retraction tucked at the bottom of a long article to acknowledge the toddler had not been wrested from her mothers arm by ICE storm troopers, we find out the mother had abducted her with the help of people smugglers while abandoning her husband and 3 other kids.  The picture was used to great effect by the Refugee and Immigrant Center for Education and Legal Services (RAICES) to raise $20mn via crowdfunding! Even after the lie was outed the group still used it to lift the target to $25mn.  US veterans are committing suicide at the rate of 20/day and people are willing to crowdfund an unethical group by 1000s of multiples. Priorities. Or is it that TDS is that extreme?

Who wants to see screaming kids? No-one. Locked in cages? Even less. Separated? Well there is good reason for that. When even the likes of left-leaning HuffPo admitted in December 2014 that 80% of women and girls are sexually assaulted while trying to make it across the border there is a good reason to question the proof of identity of the supposed parents. Even if 90% of parent/children pairs are legit, what of the 10% that aren’t? Do ICE risk it? Australia had an experience of a mother from Nepal (a democracy not at war) who deliberately poured boiling water on her infant to expedite processing on the mainland. Are these the values of people we should provide refuge to? We should not forget that many people make the journey knowing ALL the risks that confront them yet still attempt it despite the warnings.

To emphasize the danger of lax screening,  multiple kids were found dead after being abandoned once across the border as their usefulness as a golden ticket on compassionate grounds was expended. If that isn’t some of the worst forms of child abuse then what is? Moreover these people are hardly the type that decent Americans would want to embrace with open arms!

In Jan 2016 WaPo noted, “The Office of Refugee Resettlement, an agency of the Department of Health and Human Services, failed to do proper background checks of adults who claimed the children…several Guatemalan teens were found in a dilapidated trailer park near Marion, Ohio, where they were being held captive in squalid conditions by traffickers and forced to work“. So slave labour to repay human traffickers? Let’s encourage more to attempt the crossing?

Then ICE has the trouble of finding the parents/guardians (sponsors) already living (often) illegally to collect their unaccompanied children at pre-arranged court hearings. The media went into a frenzy saying that ICE had lost the records. The truth came out in Feb 2016 that,

“The head of ICE’s removal operations, Thomas Homan, told members of the Senate Judiciary Committee that 7,643 immigrants who arrived as children were sent home between the 2012 and 2015 budget years…More than 171,000 children, mostly from Honduras, El Salvador and Guatemala, were arrested at the border during that same time…The number of children caught crossing the border illegally spiked in 2014 [see impacts in NY Times graphic below] and the Obama administration promised that those who were not eligible for protections in the United States would be swiftly sent home… And with an immigration court backlog of more than 474,000 pending cases some cases can take years to move through the court system…

ICE SURGE

…about 40% of immigrants are no shows at court…Finding immigrant children with outstanding deportation orders is also complicated by the fact that they often are no longer at the addresses provided to the government.”We are out looking,” Homan said. “But they are hard to find. A lot of these folks who don’t show up in court, we don’t know where they’re at.”

The pictures of kids in concentration camp style cages were from 2014. Yet don’t let that get put in the way of a narrative to show the nationalist tendencies of the current administration.

While we can express outrage at the treatment of illegal immigrants at the border, the tougher laws have started to resonate with Ana Garcia Carias, wife of Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernandez, who said, “Stay in the country and let’s look for solutions to support you.” She visited the border and said that she didn’t recommend her citizens go to the US undocumented. If a court system has nearly 500,000 backed up in the system, it seems reasonable to push for a zero tolerance policy to end

So let’s examine the ICE data. 

To contextualize what ICE’s enforcement focus includes with respect to removable aliens we find:

(1) have been convicted of any criminal offense;
(2) have been charged with any criminal offense that has not
been resolved;
(3) have committed acts which constitute a chargeable criminal offense;
(4) have engaged in fraud or willful misrepresentation in connection with any official matter before a governmental agency;
(5) have abused any program related to receipt of public benefits;
(6) are subject to a final order of removal but have not complied with their legal obligation to depart the United States; or
(7) in the judgment of an immigration officer, otherwise pose a risk to public safety or national security.

An administrative arrest of a criminal alien is the arrest of an alien with a known criminal conviction. The figures as follows:

  • 2015: 101,800
  • 2016:  94,750
  • 2017: 105,736

Here are some of the reasons of arrest (both criminal convictions and charges) for 2017:

  • Driving under the influence : 80,547
  • Dangerous drugs: 76,503
  • Immigration violation:  62,517
  • Assault: 48,454
  • Larceny: 20,356
  • Burglary: 12,836
  • Fraud: 12,398
  • Illegal weapon possession: 11,173
  • Sex offences: 6,664
  • Stolen Vehicles: 6,174
  • Forgery: 5,210
  • Homicide: 1,886
  • Kidnapping: 2,027
  • Prostitution racketeering: 1,572

An initial book-in is the first book-in to an ICE detention facility to begin a new detention stay. This population includes aliens initially arrested by Customs & Border Protection (CBP) and transferred to ICE for removal. Once again the combined bookings are as follows

  • 2015: 307,342
  • 2016: 352,882
  • 2017: 323,591

The decrease in ICE’s overall removal numbers from FY2016 to FY2017 was primarily due to the decline in border apprehensions in 2017. Many fewer aliens were apprehended at the border in FY2017 than in FY2016—possibly reflecting an increased deterrent effect from ICE’s stronger interior enforcement efforts (which is exactly what they wish to achieve).

  • 2015: 235,413
  • 2016: 240,255
  • 2017: 226,119

In FY2017, ICE Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) conducted 143,470 overall administrative arrests, which is the highest number of administrative arrests over the past three fiscal years. Of these arrests, 92% had a criminal conviction, a pending criminal charge, were an ICE fugitive or were processed with a reinstated final order.

If one views even the short term trend of ICE operations one can see that the extent of the problem is not just a Trump issue. From even before Obama’s time, border related issues have been a festering problem. The press can beat him and his supporters senseless but it would seem he is merely fulfilling election promises. With almost half a million still to be processed in the courts, is there any sense in clogging the legal system with even more to process. Even after the repeal of legislation that prevents parent-child separations, no credit is given by his detractors despite the fact this was enacted well before he took office. Where was the press outrage during the Obama era when all the same sort of ‘abuse’ was going on? Nowhere.

People trafficking is as deplorable an occupation as can be imagined yet the idea of  publicizing open borders fuels their industry as shown in the lead up to 2014. The ultimate irony is now Frau Merkel has instituted border camps of her own as the results of her misguided altruism led to countless human traffickers to benefit from her come one, come all policies.

In summary, Rasmussen Reports notes that most Americans do not want to abolish ICE. The polling firm noted,

“only 25% of Likely U.S. Voters favor getting rid of ICE whose duties include border control. Fifty-five percent (55%) are opposed…Sixty-nine percent (69%) of Republicans and 53% of voters not affiliated with either major political party oppose getting rid of ICE. Democrats agree by a narrower 44% to 36% margin.”

AS CM always says, if people don’t like the laws, then move to change them.