Immigration, Media, Politics

NYT: Trump’s Border Security Reforms Working

Apparently, refusing to roll out the red carpet for illegal immigrants is working to deter them. According to a report by the New York Times, one-third of the 6,000 migrants forming the November caravan of “asylum” seekers decided to go back to Central America. “Data from Mexican officials suggested that harsh policies he [Trump] has introduced to crack down on asylum seekers may already be achieving some of its intended effects,” reports the Times. In that same article, the typically anti-Trump paper also admits that aspiring illegal immigrants joining the caravan are not fleeing persecution or gang violence but seeking economic opportunities in the U.S., a distinction that disqualifies them from asylum. Read more…

Here’s more from Breitbart…

A New York Times‘ article on the migrant caravans shows President Donald Trump’s border security reforms are successfully curbing the northward flow of migrants.

One-third of the 6,000 migrants who reached the border just in the November caravan have given up their effort to cross the border, the Times says: “Data from Mexican officials suggested that harsh policies he has introduced to crack down on asylum seekers may already be achieving some of its intended effects.”

The article by the establishment outlet is important because it validates Trump’s analysis and proposed fixes for the growing problem of cheap-labor migration. For example, the article shows that Trump’s critics admit his policies are working: “It may look like it’s working in the short term,” Ms. [Michelle] Brané said, “But I don’t think it’s a long-term solution. It’s driving people further into the shadows and that’s exactly the opposite of what we [pro-migation groups] want.”

Read More...

Big govt, Courts, Media, Politics

Roger Stone Calls for CNN to Testify “Tip-Off” Truth Under Oath

Following his high-profile arrest at his home last week-complete with a full CNN production team trailing the FBI-Roger Stone is calling for the “fake news” network to testify under oath that it was not a tip-off from the Department of Justice. CNN was, of course, quick to deny that its presence as the sole media outlet on the scene was anything more than “gut instinct.” According to Breitbart, Stone said: “[FBI agents] walked me out in the middle of the street to make sure the CNN camera could get great footage of the whole thing. The street was sealed off, so how CNN had a camera right outside the door that’s very hard to understand because nobody else was allowed on the street.” Read more…

Here’s more from Breitbart…

Roger Stone told Breitbart News that CNN coordinated with the “Mueller investigation” in producing “great footage” depicting him as “some sort of criminal” in order to “taint the jury pool.” He offered his remarks in a Tuesday interview on SiriusXM’s Breitbart News Daily with host Alex Marlow.

Stone recalled last Friday’s events when he was arrested by FBI agents at his home in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, with a CNN production team in tow.

Stone said, “[FBI agents] walked me out in the middle of the street to make sure the CNN camera could get great footage of the whole thing. The street was sealed off, so how CNN had a camera right outside the door; that’s very hard to understand, because nobody else was allowed on the street.”

CNN denied being tipped off by sources within Robert Mueller’s team or the broader FBI, crediting “reporter’s instinct” with its decision to have a camera crew on-site during the pre-dawn raid of Stone’s home.

 

Read More...

Big govt, Media, Politics

Twitter Enables Calls for Violence Against Children

So long as children (or their parents) are conservative and someone calling for violence against them is “verified” with that little blue check mark, Twitter will look the other way despite its well-documented history of using its anti-violence policy to crack down on opposition to the Left. This is, of course, in the wake of the Covington controversy, where high school kids’ reputations were dragged through the mud and their lives threatened through the platform all over a fake news scandal by the rabid race card faction. The founders were clear that the First Amendment is not unlimited, and we have just discovered its boundaries.

Here’s more from Breitbart…

Twitter has spent years assuring the public that it will crack down on trolling, harassment, and violent threats. It’s also pledged to tackle “misinformation” and “unhealthy conversation,” using these loaded terms as excuses to ban a wide range of anti-progressive dissidents from the platform.

But when innocent conservative high school kids are flooded with violent threats, targeted harassment and doxing on the basis of media-promoted misinformation, Jack Dorsey and his staff seem to do nothing — it even briefly promoted the smears.

Over the past 48 hours, an angry mob of Twitter users — many of them with blue checkmarks next to their name, signaling endorsement of their messages by the company — have flooded the platform with disgusting abuse, violent threats, and calls to harass innocent students of the Covington Catholic High School in Kentucky.

Read More...

Big govt, Media, Politics

AOC Blasts Factcheckers for “False Equivalency” and “Bias”

For Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), consistency is beside the point in the midst of her nascent socialist revolution. She blasted PolitiFact and The Washington Post for what she called “false equivalency” and “bias” in their criticism of her political stances and arguments with the “Green New Deal” for its unaffordability and unrealistic aims. “Facts are facts, America. We should care about getting things right. Yet standards of who gets fact-checked, how often + why are unclear,” Ocasio-Cortez tweeted Monday. “This is where false equivalency + bias creeps in, allowing climate deniers to be put on par w/scientists, for example.”

Here’s more from Fox News…

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez lashed out at fact-checkers just days after taking office, accusing them of “false equivalency” and “bias” toward her in their columns examining her statements.

Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., has been called out by fact-checkers at a steady clip since her upset primary win last year over then-Rep. Joe Crowley. She’s apparently had enough. On Monday, she took aim at PolitiFact and The Washington Post fact-check unit for supposedly singling her out.

“Facts are facts, America. We should care about getting things right. Yet standards of who gets fact-checked, how often + why are unclear,” Ocasio-Cortez tweeted Monday. “This is where false equivalency + bias creeps in, allowing climate deniers to be put on par w/ scientists, for example.”

Read More...

Big govt, Elections, Media, Politics

Vermont Newspaper on Bernie 2020: “We Beg Him Not To”

“Bernie Sanders should not run for president. In fact, we beg him not to,” quoth an editorial in the Barre Montpelier Times Argus. Primary concerns aired against 2016 socialist presidential candidate and current U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders (D-VT) were his penchant for appearing more on the mainstream media than local news outlets and the likelihood that he will simply divide the Democrats’ ticket just like last time. “We fear a Sanders run risks dividing the well-fractured Democratic Party, and could lead to another split in the 2020 presidential vote,” the editorial continued. With that sort of anti-endorsement, we’re wondering if we should jump on the Bernie train. That said, the greatest threat to the Democrats may be that so many candidates will be vying for Bernie’s socialist base.

Here’s more from Washington Examiner…

A Vermont newspaper on Monday begged Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., not to run for president in 2020.

“Bernie Sanders should not run for president. In fact, we beg him not to,” said the editorial published by the Barre Montpelier Times Argus.

“That is an unfavorable opinion, especially among most Vermonters and progressives who support the platform that has come to define him,” the paper added. “But at this point, there are more things about another Sanders run at the White House that concern us than excite us.”

The paper said another Sanders run would divide the Democratic Party, as his run did against Hillary Clinton.

“We fear a Sanders run risks dividing the well-fractured Democratic Party, and could lead to another split in the 2020 presidential vote,” it said.

Read More...

Big govt, Media, Politics

Hollywood Elites Turn War Hawks Over Trump Withdrawal from Syria

In classic if-Trump-is-for-it-we’re-against-it fashion, Hollywood elites turned pro-war in Syria as soon as President Trump announced his decision to withdraw U.S. troops from Syria. One of the key complaints – per Bill Browder – is “the single largest gift to Putin.” Mia Farrow piled on that such a strategy “benefits Russia, ISIS-still active, Iran and Assad.” She claimed that President Trump did not “consult the Pentagon.” The Left is desperate to keep the Russian collusion catastrophe relevant and in the headlines even as the Mueller investigation fizzles out. Read more…

Here’s more from RT…

The announcement by President Trump that US troops would be leaving Syria has been met with anger not just by neocons, but by Hollywood ‘liberals’ too. Aren’t progressives supposed to oppose wars and illegal occupations?
Of course, we have to be cautious. Trump’s announcement of a troop withdrawal from Syria, for now at least, is just words. We need to see evidence of soldiers leaving before we start to celebrate. We need to read the small print with a large Sherlock Holmes-style magnifying glass.

Even so, it’s a positive development as it marks a further winding down of the conflict. Some though don’t see it that way.

 

 

Read More...

Issues, Media, Politics

Leftist Professor Ponders Whether or Not Extinction of Humanity Would be a Tragedy

In what would be a pointless writing exercise – or an op-ed in The New York Times – if humanity ceased to exist, professor Todd May wonders, “Would the extinction of humanity be a tragedy?” He goes on to elaborate on various vacuous tangents and misses the entire point of human existence. All of this to which Daily Wire podcast host Andrew Klavan of “The Andrew Klavan Show” goes on the offensive, challenging May’s argument by the basic question of God: “Now, what happens when you reason without God,” Klavan asked. “Because there is a God, and because things only make sense with God, who exists, right? When you remove him, in order to reason at all, in order to speak at all, you have to put something back in its place. What does professor Todd May put in its place? He puts himself.” Read more…

Here’s more from The Daily Wire…

The New York Times recently published an opinion piece by a professor asking the question “Would the extinction of humanity be a tragedy?” Now, most of us will immediately conclude just how ridiculous the premise is, but some people — some people on the Left, to be more precise — think this idea actually carries some weight. Daily Wire podcast host Andrew Klavan breaks it down as only he can and, in the process, reveals how the op-ed demonstrates why the Left is so wrong about so many things.

“There is an article by Todd May, writing in The New York Times, that said, ‘Would the extinction of humanity be a tragedy?’ It’s important because of the way he’s thinking and why he’s wrong,” said Klavan. “In the middle of this article, he kind of flirts with some of the reasons why he’s wrong and he dithers about them for a while. But here’s the thing, every value that he’s talking about in the article — being kind, for instance — is a human value and would cease to exist without humans to notice it. The idea that consciousness is a good and suffering is a bad is a human value.”

 

Read More...

Big govt, Media, Politics

Silicon Valley Morphing Into the Morality Police

Silicon Valley used to be technology companies. But it has become the “morality police,” controlling free speech on its platforms. What could go wrong?

In a speech Monday, Apple CEO Tim Cook said: “Hate tries to make its headquarters in the digital world. At Apple, we believe that technology needs to have a clear point of view on this challenge. There is no time to get tied up in knots. That’s why we only have one message for those who seek to push hate, division and violence: You have no place on our platforms.”

Here’s the goliath problem: Who gets to define what words and phrases protected under the First Amendment constitute hate — a catchall word that is often ascribed to any offensive speech someone simply doesn’t like? Will Christians who don’t support abortion rights or having their tax dollars go toward Planned Parenthood be considered purveyors of hate for denying women the right to choose? Will millions of Americans who support legal immigration, as opposed to illegal immigration, be labeled xenophobes or racists and be banned from the digital world?

Yes and yes. How do we know? It’s already happening, as scores of conservatives nationwide are being shadow banned and/or censored on social media, YouTube, Google and beyond. Their crime? Running afoul of leftist Silicon Valley executives who demand conformity of thought and simply won’t tolerate any viewpoint that strays from their rigid political orthodoxy.

For context, consider that in oppressive Islamist regimes throughout the Middle East, the “morality police” take it upon themselves to judge women’s appearance, and if a woman doesn’t conform with their mandatory and highly restrictive dress code — e.g., wearing an identity-cloaking burqa — she could be publicly shamed, arrested or even stoned in the town square.

In modern-day America, powerful technology companies are actively taking the role of the de facto morality police — not when it comes to dress but when it comes to speech — affecting millions. Yes, to date, those affected are not getting stoned, but they are being blocked in the digital town square, where billions around the globe do their business, cultivate their livelihoods, connect with others and get news.

That is a powerful cudgel to levy against individuals and groups of people. Wouldn’t you say?

Right now, unelected tech billionaires living in a bubble in Palo Alto — when they’re not flying private to cushy climate summits in Davos — are deciding who gets to enjoy the freedom of speech enshrined in the U.S. Constitution and who does not based on whether they agree with people’s political views and opinions or not.

You see how dangerous this can get — real fast — as partisan liberal elites running Twitter, Facebook, Google (including YouTube), Apple and the like are now dictating to Americans what they can and cannot say online.

In communist regimes, these types of folks are known as central planners. The election of Donald Trump was supposed to safeguard our freedoms, especially regarding speech — a foundational pillar of a democracy. It’s disappointing that hasn’t happened, as the censorship of conservative thought online has gotten so extreme and out of control many are simply logging off for good.

A failure to address this mammoth issue could cost Trump in 2020. If his supporters are blocked online — where most voters get their news — he’ll be a one-term president.

It’s time for Congress to act before the morality police use political correctness as a Trojan horse to decide our next election.

Adriana Cohen is a syndicated columnist with the Boston Herald. Follow her on Twitter @AdrianaCohen16. To find out more about Adriana Cohen and read her past columns, please visit the Creators Syndicate webpage at www.creators.com.

COPYRIGHT 2018 CREATORS.COM

Read More...

Big govt, Media, Politics

CNN Panel Trashes Trump During Bush 41 Coverage

During a CNN panel discussion covering the death of Bush 41, they made sure to use the opportunity to trash President Trump even before he and first lady Melania Trump appeared in the rotunda to pay their respects to former President George H.W. Bush. “Barack Obama, Bill Clinton, two Democrats – they called Bush 41 a gentleman, total class. This is the embodiment of just how different it can be,” CNN special correspondent Jamie Gangel told anchor Anderson Cooper. “And that’s a message to Trump.” Read more.

Here’s more from Fox News…

A CNN panel blasted President Donald Trump on Monday immediately following his visit to the U.S. Capitol where he paid his respects to former President George H.W. Bush.

Before President Trump and first lady Melania Trump appeared in the rotunda, CNN special correspondent Jamie Gangel began by insisting that the celebration of Bush’s life “sends a message” to Trump that “this is how it’s done.”

“Barack Obama, Bill Clinton, two Democrats- they called Bush 41 a gentleman, total class. This is the embodiment of just how different it can be,” Gangel told CNN anchor Anderson Cooper. “And that’s a message to Trump.”

Gangel criticized the current president moments after he stepped out of the rotunda, saying he doesn’t “mend fences” in the wake of the open hostility that took place between Trump and the Bush family.

Read More...

Media, Politics

Conservative Late-Night Network Comedy?

No, it’s not a joke. A new late-night comedy show premiering in 2019 will be hosted by a conservative, and not only is he on the opposite side of the spectrum of his established leftist competition, he’s also an experienced firefighter. Host Victor Dweck (“Dweck”) explains the show’s politics: “We created the show because we couldn’t watch late night anymore. It’s just too hateful and insulting to people who like our president. However, with our show, we put comedy above all else, and we’re careful not to label ourselves ‘conservative comedy.’ That being said, we are both proud conservatives by today’s definition, and you will definitely see that come out in what we choose to satirize.” Read more…

Here’s more from The Daily Wire…

Late-night comedy shows are now one-trick ponies: They bash President Trump every night — sometimes in the most profane way possible (like when Samantha Bee called Ivanka Trump a “feckless c**t.”).

The modern late-night host is a pathetic imitation of the best ever, Johnny Carson. To the longtime host of “The Tonight Show,” all politics was hilarious, and he’d mock Democrats right alongside Republicans. In fact, no one was ever even sure just where “The King of Late Night” stood personally on political issues.

Today’s late night hosts, though, are now more activist than comedian, from Jimmy Kimmel to Jimmy Fallon to Seth Meyers to Stephen Colbert. They push for far-left policies, defend Democrats at every turn and rip Republicans nightly.

Read More...