Displaying the most recent of 90443 posts written by

Ruth King

Report: Migrant Apprehensions at Southern Border Drop by 37,500 in June By Jack Crowe

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/report-migrant-apprehensions-at-southern-border-drop-by-37500-in-june/

The number of migrants apprehended crossing the southern border illegally dropped by more than 37,500 in June, the first month-to-month decline since apprehensions began skyrocketing six months ago.

Border Patrol agents apprehended 94,487 people crossing the border between ports of entry in Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and California in June after capturing 132,000 migrants at the southern border the previous month, the Washington Examiner reported Tuesday.

While the official figures have not yet been released, Acting Secretary of Homeland Security Kevin McAleenan estimated during a recent press conference that June saw a 25 percent decline in apprehensions. The numbers reported by the Examiner indicate a 28 percent decline.

McAleenan credited President Trump’s recent tariff threat with prompting increased border enforcement by Mexican officials. But the weather may also have played a role as apprehensions usually drop off from spring to summer due to dangerously hot temperatures.

What Would Colleges be Like If SATs Were the Sole Admission Criterion? By Peter Skurkiss

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/07/what_would_colleges_be_like_if_sats_were_the_sole_admission_criterion.html

Many bar and dorm room conversations probably have centered on what colleges would look like if SAT scores were the sole criteria for admission. People have had their suspicions and cite anecdotal observations but now Georgetown University has quantitatively answered the question as least as far as elite universities go.

Anyone with a passing awareness of today’s college admission policies knows that the student makeup would change if academics were the sole criteria. How much they would change is the question. As to whether using just SAT scores — i.e. academic performance — is good or bad is another matter.

Back to the Georgetown report.

It claims the percentage of blacks and Hispanics would fall sharply from 19 percent to 11 percent. The whites student population would rise from 66 percent to 77 percent.  And surprisingly, Asian students would fall from 11 percent to 10 percent. The study goes on to say that many of the whites in these select college would lose their seats to other better qualified white students.  

 In other words, the student mix would change noticeably.

There are a number of reasons why higher academically performing students lose seats to others. There are legacy admissions and sport scholarships. Both these skew the college population downward on the academic scale especially when it comes to big money-making sports like football and basketball. However, the greatest factor is a commitment to racial diversity. College administrators will literally go to any length the prove they are ‘woke.’

Zero Hedge noted that black and Latino college enrolment is almost twice what it would be based on “merit” alone. And this is before the College Board introduces its so-called “adversity score,” which is specifically designed to increase the minority presence in universities, to accompany a student’s SAT result.

Why Are They All So Angry? Francis Menton

https://www.manhattancontrarian.com/blog/2019-7-8-why-are-they-all-so-angry

It’s the defining characteristic of today’s progressive left: Anger. And it’s not just the rioters like Antifa, or the unspeakably rude people who confront administration figures in restaurants and gratuitously yell at them. Take a look at any of the new icons of the Democratic Party when they are speaking — for example Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, or Ilhan Omar — and you see them seething with barely controllable anger, if not outright fury. Same with essentially every left-wing commenter on CNN or MSNBC.

And I’m just getting to the Democratic presidential candidates. Bernie Sanders. Is there anybody angrier? Always, and about everything. For that matter, all the contenders who have broken out of the less-than-1% category (and most of those who haven’t) are putting on a show of trying to out-angry all the others. Elizabeth Warren, Cory Booker, Kamala Harris. Anger must be what sells these days to the categories of voters they are pursuing.

But how about Joe Biden, you say? Certainly he is not as angry as these others. You must have missed Biden’s July 5 interview with Chris Cuomo of CNN. Having just been outmaneuvered by Kamala Harris at the first Democratic debate, Biden decided that it was time to show that he can do anger with the best of them. According to that New York Post report of the interview, “throughout it all, Biden was angry.” It reached the boiling point when Cuomo raised the issue of Russian election interference, drawing this outraged response from Biden:

“You think that would happen on my watch, on Barack’s watch? You can’t answer that, but I promise you it wouldn’t have. And it didn’t.”

Sure, Joe.

Jeffrey Epstein’s Lolita Express and the art of unequal justice The nexus of power, money, and influence is why this scandal is likely to widen Charles Lipson

https://spectator.us/jeffrey-epstein-lolita-express-unequal-justice/

Jeffrey Epstein’s arrest on federal charges of sex trafficking minors has all the features of a tabloid extravaganza: money, sex, power, and serious crimes. No one deserves the notoriety more. The billionaire financier was already convicted of similar crimes in 2008 and received a very light sentence. Epstein’s plea bargain ended the earlier investigation before any of his friends were implicated. That won’t happen again. The floodlights are on this one.

In 2008, the prosecution negotiated the plea deal while it kept victims in the dark. The underage girls Epstein exploited were not notified in advance about the agreement or allowed to object. A federal judge recently ruled the case was mishandled and the victims should have been heard.

The old case resonates today, not only because the new charges echo the old ones but because the US attorney in charge then, Alex Acosta, is now secretary of labor. The unusual deal had to be approved in Washington, though it is still unclear which Department of Justice officials gave it the green light or why. We’ll undoubtedly learn more about the old case as the new one unfolds.

One thing is certain about the new charges. They will not proceed quietly through the courts, away from inquiring eyes. This time, they are front-page news. The DoJ has already devoted serious attention to them, and they won’t be interested in a backroom deal. The press will be interested, too. The more big names and juicy details, the better.

William Barr says he sees legal way to add citizenship question to 2020 census

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/barr-census-citizenship-question-sees-legal-way-to-add-it/

Edgefield, S.C. — Attorney General William Barr said Monday he sees a way to legally require 2020 census respondents to declare whether or not they are citizens, despite a Supreme Court ruling that forbade asking the question.

In an interview with The Associated Press, Barr said the Trump administration will take action in the coming days that he believes will allow the government to add the controversial census query. Barr would not detail the plans, though a senior official said President Trump is expected to issue a memorandum to the Commerce Department instructing it to include the question on census forms.

The Supreme Court recently blocked the question, at least temporarily, saying the administration’s justification “seems to have been contrived.” That was a blow to Mr. Trump, who has been pressing for the government to demand information about citizenship.

The U.S. Census Bureau’s experts have said requiring such information would discourage immigrants from participating in the survey and result in a less accurate count. That in turn would redistribute money and political power away from Democratic-led cities where immigrants tend to cluster to whiter, rural areas where Republicans do well.

Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Monday that Mr. Trump wants to add the demand for citizenship information because he wants to “make America white again.”

Meanwhile, the Justice Department is replacing the legal team that has been pursuing Mr. Trump’s efforts, putting in place a new team consisting of both career and politically appointed attorneys.

In Praise of Crowdfunding By Douglas Murray

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/noah-carl-andy-ngo-in-praise-of-crowdfunding/

The deranging effects of tech are visible every day. But there are also positive aspects — among them a tool that strikes me as having many of the capabilities needed to restore some sanity to our times. I refer to the process of crowdfunding. In recent weeks I have been struck by the response to two crowdfunding efforts in particular, which are vital in different ways.

The first relates to the case of Andy Ngo, the young Portland-based journalist whom I wrote about here last week. Ngo, readers will remember, was recently assaulted by so-called “Antifa” in broad daylight as the police stood aside. In the hospital afterwards it became clear that he had suffered a brain hemorrhage, among other injuries. Another journalist immediately set up a crowdfunding site to try to help pay Ngo’s substantial medical bills and to replace the equipment that the Portland Antifa thugs had broken or stolen from him. The goal of that crowdfunding appeal was reached (and indeed exceeded) in a matter of days by American citizens and others horrified at what had been allowed to happen on their streets.

Now another crowdfunder has been set up, this time to launch legal proceedings against those responsible for assaulting the journalist. Among those who may be in the firing line of legal proceedings are not just the thugs who the authorities have allowed to run rampant through an American city, but also the authorities themselves. A link to the legal appeal can be found here.

Kentucky Democrat Amy McGrath Announces 2020 Challenge to McConnell By Mairead McArdle

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/kentucky-democrat-amy-mcgrath-announces-2020-challenge-to-mcconnell/

Kentucky Democrat Amy McGrath on Tuesday announced that she will run to unseat Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell in 2020.

The former Marine fighter pilot and mother of three, who lost her 2018 bid to defeat Republican representative Andy Barr, made her announcement in a video message posted to Twitter.

McGrath says in the video that she wrote a letter when she was 13 to McConnell, her senator, telling him she wanted to fly fighter jets in combat.

“He never wrote back,” McGrath says in the video. “I’ve often wondered, how many other people did Mitch McConnell never take the time to write back or even think about.”

“Everything that’s wrong with Washington had to start somewhere — it started with him,” she wrote in an accompanying tweet.

McGrath argued that “the things that Kentuckians voted for Trump for are not being done” thanks to McConnell, who she explained has blocked legislation his constituents supported, such as measures that would have lowered drug pricing.

A Modest Immigration Proposal By Victor Davis Hanson

https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/07/progressive-colleges-can-house-illegal-immigrants-dorms/

College campuses have lots of empty housing during the summer. Proudly progressive institutions such as Harvard, Yale, and Stanford should welcome illegal immigrants.

R epresentative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D., N.Y.) believes that American detention centers that house illegal aliens — over 1 million illegal arrivals during the last six months alone — are similar to “concentration camps.” A storm of criticism met her historically fallacious comparisons. Ocasio-Cortez doubled down on her Hitlerian reference by pedantically claiming that she was referencing “concentration” rather than “death” camps, and thus despite sloganeering “Never Again,” with a wink and nod, she was supposedly not suggesting that Auschwitz was quite comparable to America’s border facilities.

She then doubled down again by visiting the border. On the basis of no evidence, she was soon claiming that detained illegal aliens were drinking out of toilets, as well as alleging that immigration officers met her social-welfare activism with rudeness and sexual innuendo.

Where to start with her abject historical ignorance?

One, America’s detention centers bear no resemblance to concentration camps of the past. Illegal aliens know that there is some chance that, after they enter the U.S. illegally, they may be apprehended and detained. If they really believed the conditions of their detention resembled “concentration camps,” which historically are scenes of mass death, they would never have come.

Millions of Russians by summer 1942 were not voluntarily flooding across German lines on the expectation that they’d survive, much less thrive, in Nazi “concentration camps.” The German public did not pressure the Nazi hierarchy to allow lawyers and counselors into Soviet POW camps. Boer children did not migrate to British territory on the rationale that their detention would be without hazard.

Certainly, undocumented immigrants — receiving, for example, “free” transgendered counseling and hormonal treatment while in American custody — do not resemble the inmates of “concentration camps.” American immigration authorities are trying to facilitate brief detentions and expedite both deportations and refugee hearings to curb the number of detainees. In exact opposite fashion, the wardens of concentration camps historically have wanted to lock up as many people as possible — not release them.

THE TRUMP EFFECT: AMB. (RET.) YORAM ETTINGER

https://bit.ly/2S1WeHb

The initial two and a half years of President Trump’s national security policy have departed sharply from those of President Obama, his predecessor at the White House.

The nature of Trump’s national security policy may be assessed through the worldview of Vice President Mike Pence and the two most crucial appointments:Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who was a “Tea Party” leader in the US House of Representatives, and National Security Advisor John Bolton, who has been a consistent advocate of a bolstered US posture of deterrence – in the face of rogue regimes and organizations – by flexing political, economic and military muscle. In 1991, it was Bolton who led the successful US campaign to revoke “Zionism is Racism” from UN records. Both Pompeo and Bolton have been consistent critics of Obama’s national security policy. 

The worldview of President Obama (and his Secretary of State, John Kerry) was shaped by the following principles:

1. No US moral, political, economic exceptionalism;

2. Preference of multinational – over unilateral – initiatives;

3. Considering the UN as a key factor in shaping the global arena;

4. Viewing non-assertive Western Europe as a role model;

5. Embracing the worldview of the State Department establishment, which has been persistently divorced from Middle East complexity (e.g., the “Arab Spring” illusion);

6. Adopting negotiation, reconciliation and containment as key tactics when dealing with rogue regimes (e.g., the 2015 JCPOA nuclear agreement);

7. Approaching rogue Islamic entities as potential allies rather than lethal opponents and enemies (e.g., “Islam has always been a part of the American Story,” Cairo, June 4, 2009);

8.  Playing down Islamic terrorism by designating the murder of 13 Fort Hood, TX, US soldiers by radical Muslim Major Nidal Hasan, as “workplace violence” (and later on, as “combat related casualties”), prohibiting the use of the term “Islamic terrorism;”

9. Defining the Palestinian issue as the root cause of the Arab-Israeli conflict, a core cause of Middle East turbulence and a crown-jewel of Arab policy-makers;

10. Assuming that a resolution – not management – of conflicts is a realistic option in the unpredictable, violent, intolerant, volcanic Middle East, which has never experienced long-term intra-Muslim peaceful coexistence.

 

Twice as Many Americans Have Confidence in Police than the Media Daniel Greenfield

https://www.frontpagemag.com/point/274246/twice-many-americans-have-confidence-police-media-daniel-greenfield

You might think that doesn’t mean much.

I have more confidence in your average schizophrenic homeless man screaming at ghosts than I do in the media. And you probably think I’m being too generous.

But the pattern here is that conservative institutions still tend to inspire more confidence than lefty ones.

Just three institutions — the military (73%), small business (68%) and the police (53%) — have garnered majority levels of confidence in all polls Gallup has conducted on each measure over the past two decades. The military has been the top-ranked institution or tied for the top-ranked institution each year since 1986.

Though 38% of Americans say they have confidence in the U.S. presidency, it is exceeded by the percentage of people who have very little or no confidence in this branch of government (44%), giving this institution a net-negative score.

Slightly more than a third of Americans also express confidence in the Supreme Court (38%), organized religion (36%) and the medical system (36%), while slightly less than a third have confidence in banks (30%), public schools (29%) and organized labor (29%).

Fewer than one in four Americans have confidence in the criminal justice system (24%), newspapers (23%) and big business (23%).

Americans have the least confidence in television news (18%) and Congress (11%). 

I wonder why.