Mueller Confirms His Anti-Trump Bias With His Own Mouth and More [Video]

Mueller impeachment

Special Counsel Robert Mueller made a short public statement on May 29, 2019, which confirmed the Leftist bias of the Russia ‘investigation’ and of his report. Moreover, he banished all doubt of his personal bias against the President of the United States and passed the baton to Congress to complete the attempt to destroy him.

The most remarkable part of this was that Mueller did all of that with one sentence.

If we had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so.

To the Leftist press and anyone else who believes this is somehow a plausible accusation against Trump, I would ask this question. Doe’s anyone seriously believe that if Mueller’s team did have confidence the president committed a crime, they wouldn’t have said so?

It would have been shouted from every Leftist media outlet in the world! Which, after the most thorough and hostile of investigations over two years, clearly means Mueller was indeed confident that no crime had been committed.

In other words, we couldn’t find Trump guilty of anything, but that doesn’t mean he should be considered innocent. First of all, this turns the millennia of civilized jurisprudence on its head by assuming that the individual must prove he is innocent, rather than making the state prove he is guilty.

Secondly, this gives verbal confirmation of what most conservatives have known all along, Mueller and his cohorts are Leftist anti-Trump zealots and are hopelessly and dangerously bias.

Mueller’s Investigation Was Tainted from the Start

Mueller and impeachmentWhen Mueller became the Special Counsel in the investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 election he put together a very select team of 16 lawyers to help carry it out. 13 of those were Democrats, and 3 have no political affiliation. Mueller himself is an anti-Trump Republican, of that there is now no reasonable doubt.

Thus the very makeup of Mueller’s team manifested a conflict of interest and exhibited Leftist anti-Trump bias at the beginning. Many prominent conservative commentators have mentioned this concern before, and the President himself recently mentioned that, in addition to another interesting fact about Mueller being turned down for the FBI Director’s job.

Robert Mueller came to the Oval Office (along with other potential candidates) seeking to be named the Director of the FBI. He had already been in that position for 12 years, I told him NO. The next day he was named Special Counsel – A total Conflict of Interest. NICE!

Over two years ago this whole fiasco was launched into motion by a blatantly anti-Trump panel of lawyers out to take down the President of the United States. Yet, despite their best [or worst] efforts, they couldn’t accomplish that task for the Left.

Mueller and impeachmentOnce the Mueller report was fully released six weeks ago the Leftmedia could no longer provide any semblance of cover for failing to destroy Trump. The accurate ruling of no evidence of collusion or obstruction by the Trump campaign or Trump himself had dashed their flimsy hopes of defeating their mortal enemy.

Moreover, some of what was revealed cast grave suspicion upon the FBI in particular. Enough to raise the eyebrows of Attorney General William Barr and cause him to begin an investigation into the investigators.

This, along with the upcoming Justice Department Inspector General’s report which is expected to have bad news for the FBI, put real pressure on the anti-Trump Left. Enough pressure to scuttle their hopes to defeat President Trump in 2020.

Well never fear dear anti-Trumpers because your hero ‘Bobby boy’ Mueller came riding to the rescue with his one-and-only public statement [maybe?] about this. In effect, he opines, I couldn’t do what you and I both wanted, but I can help you punish this dastardly, horrible president.

Mueller Passes the ‘Impeachment’ Baton

It appears that Mueller, who also announced the closing of the office of Special Counsel and his return to private practice in his statement, gave his final gift to the Left with the suggestion of impeaching President Trump. However this may seem, it was not a move born of desperation, but a deliberate and planned effort on Mueller’s part.

The introduction to the volume two of our report explains that decision. It explains that under long-standing department policy a president cannot be charged with a federal crime while he is in office. That is unconstitutional. …Charging the president with a crime was, therefore, not an option we could consider. …the constitution requires a process other than the criminal justice system to formally accuse a sitting president of wrongdoing.

Mueller and impeachmentThe ‘process’ Mueller means is, of course, impeachment by the House of Representatives. In effect, Mueller is saying to his fellow anti-Trumpers, I’ve done my part, now it’s your part to finish the job of destroying President Trump.

Understand that Mueller already knew from the beginning that he couldn’t actually charge the president with a crime because he wasn’t conducting a criminal investigation in the first place. He didn’t even charge the Russians because he knew he couldn’t so he sent their cases to the District Court of Washington D.C. for legal indictment.

That indictment was filed officially in February of 2018 under this heading.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA …

INDICTMENT

The Grand Jury for the District of Columbia charges:

Mueller also knew from the start that his investigation would never take down Trump on its own. He knew that his real job was to provide impeachment fodder for the Democrats going into the 2020 election cycle.

The reactions of the Left politicos and the Leftmedia, as Tucker Carlson pointed out, show that Mueller was successful in passing on the impeachment baton. The clamor for impeaching President Trump is now at an all-time high in those quarters, thanks to Robert Mueller.

Now that this baton has been passed, we will see if the House will run with it. I believe they will try, and they will make the attempt relatively soon.

The Left really has no choice but to go for impeachment before the 2020 election if they do it at all. Otherwise, they will have to live with four more years of a renewed Trump administration advancing American greatness, and for them, that thought is anathema.

So, get ready for the impeachment show, America. I hope and pray that in the midst of this dangerous foolishness, the majority of the country may see the real Leftist agenda of destruction displayed as never before and reject it completely.

The wise lay up knowledge, but the mouth of a fool brings ruin near. Proverbs 10:14 [ESV]

D.T. Osborn

Sources: The Holy Bible, English Standard Version, Crossway Bibles, 2001

Featured and Top Image courtesy of Marco Verch’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 1 courtesy of DonkeyHotey’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 2 courtesy of Charles Edward Miller’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 3 courtesy of Master Steve Rapport’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License

All other sources linked or cited in the text

Originally published in TIL Journal

A Behavioral Experiment: Predicting the Pro-Abortion Left’s Response to Alabama and Company [Video]

Scientist.article.5.23.2019

There has been a number of states who recently passed measures to severely limit and outlaw abortion. These pro-life laws have brought down the wrath of the Leftists who favor abortion at all times and for any reason.

The most controversial of these so far is the new Alabama law criminalizing abortion except for saving the life of the mother. With this and other such activities in mind, I decided to conduct an experiment concerning Leftist’s mindsets on abortion and see if they really were as easy to predict as I surmised.

This experiment was conducted in two steps. First, I drew from my experience in the pro-life movement for 36 years and predicted seven reactions from the Left to this law in advance. Then I compared my predictions to the actual responses represented by 10 articles either giving the Leftist response or pieces talking about multiple responses.

Predicting the Predictable

Leftist, pro-abortion

My predictions took the form of generalizations, as I had no way of knowing in advance the precise wording which was used in the articles. Here are my seven prognostications of Leftist responses to the new pro-life legislation in states such as Alabama and Georgia.

1.) In at least one article, [and likely many] the response that the new law is attempting to regulate women’s bodies will be mentioned.
2.) Ditto for one or more mentions that the law is a threat to Roe v. Wade.
3.)There will be false assertions of what the law actually requires.
4.) In some manner, the humanity of the unborn child will be denied.
5.) It will be asserted that the law will harm women.
6.) Trump will be criticized because he is pro-life.
7.) The ‘far-right’ and/or the ‘religious right,’ will be blamed and scorned.

I made these predictions at 8:51AM, CDT,  on May 18, 2019. I realize that the reader will have no way of knowing for certain that I didn’t read the article responses ahead of time except for my word that I didn’t do so.

However, besides my assurance, when the results are tabulated it should bolster my claims… I hope. I returned to the experiment for part two on 5/21/2019 and checked on how my predictions panned out.

The results are calculated by number for each source that was cited. Whether or not a particular prediction was actually used more than once in an article was not noted, merely counted as one ‘fulfillment’ of a prediction.

It should be noted that this is far from any kind of scientific survey. I selected 10 examples only, which is insufficient for any definitive conclusion according to statistical science.

I suggest, however, that even this small sample could be expanded over a longer period of time with more responses and the results would vary only slightly. More importantly, even this smattering of evidence reveals the priorities and motivations of the Left when they try to argue for a woman’s ‘right to choose.’

Each example of at least one predicted response is noted in the list below. I read each article and recorded the instances when a predicted Leftist reaction/response occurred and assigning it a number from my list of 7.

218px-Protesting_Illinois_6th_District_Republican_Congressman_Peter_Roskam_Chicago_Illinois_7-26-18_2843_(42951185284)In other words, in the first article, I found at least one example of my number 2 prediction that the new laws would be seen as a threat to Roe v. Wade. This ‘raw data’ if you will, is compiled and analyzed afterward, as will be seen.

1.) From a Reuters story, 5/16/2019: Responses 2, 4, and 6 were shown in this.  https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-abortion-republicans-idUSKCN1SM2KL

2.) From a Washington Post story, 5/15/2019: Responses 2, 4, 5, and 6 occurred here. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/democratic-2020-candidates-warn-roe-v-wade-at-stake-after-alabama-abortion-bans-passage/2019/05/15/f4f77c7a-7719-11e9-bd25-c989555e7766_story.html?utm_term=.9f0f3f2842b3

3.) From Townhall.com story about the reactions 5/16/2019: Responses 1, 2, and 4 are used in this example.   https://townhall.com/columnists/davidlimbaugh/2019/05/17/democrats-unhinged-over-alabamas-abortion-bill-n2546477

4.) From a NY Times article on 5/14/2019: This uses predicted responses 2 and 5  https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/14/us/abortion-law-alabama.html

5.) From a NY Times ‘op-ed’ with a pro-abortion actress, 5/15/2019: Here we find responses 1, 4, and 5.  https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/15/style/busy-philipps-abortion-youknowme.html?  action=click&module=RelatedCoverage&pgtype=Article&region=Footer

6.) From an article concerning Leftist talking points on “The Federalist” site highlighting social media posts from the pro-abort crowd: Here it can be seen that points 1, 2, 4, and 5 are used.  https://thefederalist.com/2019/05/17/many-pro-choice-talking-points-border-propaganda/?utm_source=The+Federalist+List&utm_campaign=215d30f116-RSS_The_Federalist_Daily_Updates_w_Transom&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_cfcb868ceb-215d30f116-84040107

7.)From a National Review article concerning NPR’s rules for discussing abortion: Predicted response number 4 is mentioned.  https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/nprs-abortion-rules/

8.)From a May 19, 2019 ‘Intellectual Conservative’ article on leftist reactions: Here predictions 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 7 can be found. http://www.intellectualconservative.com/the-progressives-socialist-anti-science-on-abortion/

9.)From a May 21, 2019, Townhall Article on a pro-abortion rally in D.C.: Numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 are featured. https://townhall.com/tipsheet/bethbaumann/2019/05/21/pro-abortionists-held-a-stopthebans-rally-outside-the-supreme-court-heres-what-n2546698?utm_source=thdaily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl&newsletterad=05/22/2019&bcid=8620a513a8eac12722df4b6aed35298b&recip=27779030

10.)From May 21, 2019, on ‘Twitchy.com’ about the pro-abort protest in D.C.: This piece featured responses 1, 3, 4, and 5. https://twitchy.com/sarahd-313035/2019/05/21/wtf-is-she-smoking-dem-rep-jackie-speier-takes-a-page-from-aocs-book-to-argue-for-abortion-rights-video/?utm_source=twtydaily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=nl&bcid=8620a513a8eac12722df4b6aed35298b

Results and Some Surprises

Leftist, Pro-abortionThe results of this ‘experiment’ yielded a mixed bag of the expected and the surprising among the pro-abort Left’s responses.

All of the predicted responses appeared at least once. However, the top four responses are revealing about the mindset of the Leftists as these give vital clues to what they consider most important in the abortion battle.

The highest frequency pro-abort response among those I had predicted was number ‘4.) In some manner, the humanity of the unborn child will be denied.’  In 9 of the 10 examples, this response was observed.

The next most frequent Leftist response was number ‘2.) …mentions that the law is a threat to Roe v. Wade.’ This was used in 7 different pieces.

The third most frequent response was recorded 6 times in two different articles. First is prediction ‘1.) In at least one article, [and likely many] the response that the new law is attempting to regulate women’s bodies will be mentioned’ which is tied with response number ‘5.) It will be asserted that the law will harm women.’

The other three predicted responses had a large drop in stating what I assumed they would. Only 3 pieces used predicted reaction number ‘3.) There will be false assertions of what the law actually requires.’ Two articles used the number 6 prediction that ‘Trump will be criticized because he is pro-life.’

The most unexpected result to this author was that only one response used number 7.) The ‘far-right’ and/or the ‘religious right,’ will be blamed and scorned. In some cases responses that I should have predicted also appear in these articles I examined.

One of those is the false claim that the Bible and Christianity are supportive of abortion, which was cited in at least one case. This journal has covered that claim in a number of past articles.

Another false claim from the Left that I should have expected was the accusation that these laws are a reflection of ‘racism’ on the part of conservatives. The racism claim did surface, however, I did not record the number of times it appeared.

In The Final Analysis

From this small experiment, we can only make limited assumptions rather than hard conclusions. Yet, these assumptions are not without merit and can be instructive to gain some understanding of the destructive worldview that pro-abort Leftists embrace, in order to rightly oppose its evil design.

Of course, the pro-abort Left could as easily make predictions about the pro-life responses to these new state laws concerning abortion. I would concede that, however, I also would stress that one side is predictable for its object to preserve life, while the other is staunch in a campaign to destroy life.

Leftist, pro-abortion

If the frequency of occurrence indicates importance, the factor the pro-abort Left considers most important is that the humanity of the unborn is denied always, regardless of the truth. The pro-abortion mindset is that above all else and at any cost, it cannot be admitted that the unborn child is a living human being.

The second most important point is that Roe v. Wade must be untouchable. Roe v. Wade is the Left’s symbolic Holy Grail and it is considered a sacred validation of an absolute right.

The problem with that position is the history of bad precedent from the U.S. Supreme Court, namely the 1857 “Dred Scott” decision. “Roe” has been compared many times with this infamous SCOTUS ruling which enshrined the institution of slavery as a supposed constitutional ‘right’.

The comparison is from a different era and addresses a different issue, but the point is the same. That point being that just because the SCOTUS makes a ruling does not automatically create a newly-imagined Constitutional right.

The third item on the pro-abortion acolytes’ list of most cherished beliefs is that pro-life advocates wish to regulate and control women’s bodies. Any threat to the full legalization without exception of abortion on demand is a perceived threat to a woman’s bodily autonomy, and therefore must be opposed.

The final important finding is that abortion is portrayed as good for women’s ‘health,’ while any other solution to a pregnancy, including birth, is harmful to women. This fiction is peddled constantly and is easily refuted by many facts, not the least of which is this, as Anna Paprocki writes in the Federalist,

There is no federal abortion reporting requirement. Even the pro-abortion Guttmacher Institute acknowledges that the current “patchwork of surveillance efforts” relies on “incomplete” reports from states and that California—estimated to account for 17 percent, or one out of every six abortions in the country—is one of three states that “do not report to the CDC at all.” Guttmacher uses voluntary reporting from abortionists, filtered through its own ideological lens, which fails to fill these gaping holes.

The following video demonstrates the use of these four beliefs employed by the pro-abort Left in a brief debate recently shown on CNN.

The desperation of the Leftist pro-aborts is evident from the blatant denial of reality especially on the part of the woman in the video, as well as the deflection of the host. For example, Cuomo is correct when he says that no states currently allow for the killing of a child already born in an attempted abortion.

However, he also fails to mention that Virginia recently tried to pass such a law which was proposed in January of this year. The law failed to pass in that state, but it is a harbinger of things to come if Leftists have their way.

America must make the choice to embrace either life or death and in doing so embrace either God’s curse or His blessings. The lovers of abortion today are clearly favoring a choice of death without understanding the terrible consequences that will follow.

I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse. Therefore choose life, that you and your offspring may live.  Deuteronomy 30:19 [ESV]

D.T. Osborn

Sources: The Holy Bible, English Standard Version, Crossway Bibles, 2001

Featured and Top Image courtesy of Wikimedia Commons by Isaiah Mahanga – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 1 courtesy of Wikimedia Commons by JRBrown – Public Domain
Inset Image 2 courtesy of Wikimedia Commons by Charles Edward Miller – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 3 courtesy of Wikimedia Commons by Sam Pullara – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 4 courtesy of Wikimedia Commons by Rebecca W. – Creative Commons License

All other sources linked or cited in the text

Originally published in TIL Journal

The Mueller Collusion Circus Theatre of the Absurd [Video]

Collusion Obstruction

Since the release of the Mueller report the Leftist political-media mafia in America has behaved like a teen caught altering an F to an A. In other words, they are being true to character, especially during the era of President Trump.

The Left is increasingly at a loss to provide actual reasons for opposing the President now that the Mueller boogeyman has been defeated. For two years these fanatical miscreants have awakened each morning and offered obeisance to the office of the special counsel only to find their fervent prayers to that idol unanswered.

In spite of all of their spite, President Trump remains in office and moreover has done an outstanding job on behalf of the American people. All the while, this President has labored against unprecedented opposition both in the Congress and the Judiciary, as well as virulent and truly ugly Leftmedia hatred.

How is the Left handling the revelation that President Trump did not collude with the Russians, or anyone else, to ‘fix’ the 2016 election? They are handling it with all the immaturity and obtuse deflection of a toddler, which is what has come to be expected these days.

The Mueller Collusion Circus headlines the political ‘theatre of the absurd,’ in 2019. It is a classic comedy of errors, which is to say it is a tragedy, in two acts.

Act 1: The Collusion Delusion

Collusion ObstructionIt has now been almost two months since Attorney General William Barr released his four-page summary of the Mueller report. The immediate reaction from the Left to its release was twofold.

The most common response was along the lines of, “we have to see the whole report because we think you, the AG, are a partisan liar.” This was a typical quote from the political spectrum.

his letter leaves more questions than answers. A sanitized summary from Trump’s hand-picked bodyguard is not acceptable. Barr has his finger on the scale to protect Trump. The full report should be released immediately,” Rep. Bill Pascrell Jr., D-N.J., in a tweet. [italics added]

AG Barr was more than accommodating to the demands and has presented the full, over 400 page Mueller report, at the beginning of May with as much material revealed as is legally allowable. Yet that was not enough for the Leftists, and they demanded the AG actually break the law or he should be held in contempt of Congress for… umm…not breaking the law! Rep. Jarrold Nadler [D-NY] was,

“…asking in a subpoena for Attorney General Barr to break the law or else he would hold him in contempt,”… After voting to hold Barr in contempt, the New York Democrat told reporters that he and his fellow Democrats “did not relish” holding the attorney general in contempt for not turning over the entire fully unredacted special counsel Robert Mueller’s report and its underlying evidence, but felt they “had no choice.”

There is a particular phrase here that can easily be ignored but is extremely important in determining the intentions of Leftists in Congress. Nadler said that they wanted not simply the unredacted Mueller report, but also ‘its underlying evidence.’

Obstruction collusionThe ‘underlying evidence’ refers to the over 1 million documents provided to the special counsel during his investigation. This generates a natural question, ‘Why would they want so many documents?’

The answer would be that those documents spread over six congressional committees and their staff would most likely be leaked to the Leftmedia in a desperate attempt to try and damage Trump in 2020. When one considers that an illegal leak from former FBI Director James Comey started the absurdity circus rolling, Trump was both prudent and justified by exerting executive privilege over that material.

“The Attorney General has been transparent and accommodating throughout this process, including by releasing the no-collusion, no-conspiracy, no-obstruction Mueller Report to the public and offering to testify before the Committee. These attempts to work with the Committee have been flatly rejected. They didn’t like the results of the report, and now they want a redo,” Press Secretary Sarah Sanders said in a statement on Wednesday. “Faced with Chairman Nadler’s blatant abuse of power, and at the Attorney General’s request, the President has no other option than to make a protective assertion of executive privilege.”

However, many on the Left also realize that the Russia collusion angle isn’t working especially since the Mueller investigation produced no charges from it. Thus, they are moving forward in another direction linked to the second half of the Mueller tome, that the President somehow obstructed justice by trying to stop the investigation, cue Act 2.

Act 2: The Obstruction Construction

Russia collusionSince the collusion story doesn’t pass muster, the Left is more focused at present with the idea that President Trump interfered in some manner with the Mueller investigation, and that this constitutes obstruction of justice. However, there remain two very large facts that negate this construction of obstruction.

The most obvious fact is what is missing from either part of the Mueller report. There are no charges for obstruction recommended in it.

If the Mueller team could have found actual obstruction of justice, does anyone believe they would not have recommended charges? Moreover, since we are not now watching the impeachment proceedings against President Trump it is safe to assume no obstruction occurred.

However, it has been noted on the Left that though Trump did not fire the special counsel, he thought about it. Yet, upon advice from his chief counsel Don McGhan, the President changed his mind.

Trump asked McGahn if he would talk to Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein (who has authority over the special counsel) about it …McGahn, though, told the president in no uncertain terms that firing Mueller – the head of the probe into possible collusion by Trump associates with Moscow – would be a horrible idea and blow up in his face, the source said. Trump took McGahn’s advice and dropped active consideration of firing Mueller

Russia collusion, obstructionSo …Trump was justifiably upset at being railroaded on a false accusation of “collusion” and being roasted by the Leftmedia and wanted to fire Mueller but instead took the wise advice of his staff and he is to be punished for that!? By the way, even if he had fired Mueller, it still wouldn’t be obstruction because the investigation would have continued with someone else in charge.

The second large fact which destroys the accusation of obstruction of justice is that “collusion” is not a crime. Thus, the Mueller investigation was not a criminal investigation which means there should never have been a special counsel appointed at all!

The Russia investigation is instead a counterintelligence investigation. Such investigations are designed to gather information about suspected harmful activities against the nation, and not to bring criminal charges.

Former U.S. Attorney Andrew McCarthy writes,

It is worth repeating that the Russia investigation is a counterintelligence probe; it was not a judicial proceeding or a criminal investigation. Counterintelligence probes are not conducted to enforce the law through judicial proceedings; they are conducted to inform the president of threats posed by foreign powers. The president may shut them down at will, and doing so does not obstruct justice in any way.

McCarthy nails what the Leftists can’t [or won’t] understand when he specifies that the purpose of a counterintelligence probe is “to inform the president of threats posed by foreign powers.” The results of this investigation were never meant to be seen by anyone besides the President and the investigating team.

The so-called ‘deep state’ simply ignored this mandate and manipulated the DOJ and the press, aided by the leak from James Comey, to get a special counsel appointed anyway. The result is that an improper and possibly illegal investigation targeting the President of the United States was conducted under false pretenses and the Left wants to continue investigating under a false allegation of obstruction of justice.

Epilog: The Left May Be ‘Reaping the Whirlwind’

There may just be a ‘silver lining’ in the midst of the Leftist absurdity and insanity about the Mueller report and hatred for all things Trump. The time is perhaps upon us to conduct a real criminal investigation into the Mueller investigators themselves.

At least this is the judgment of AG Barr who has recently decided to do that, and the Left isn’t happy about it. Conservative pundit Jon Miller explains in the video below.

The Left will try to denounce Barr’s new investigation and deflect attention from it. However, they may soon experience the biblical truth that you reap both what you sow and more than you sow, and that can sometimes be a very bad thing.

For they sow the wind, and they shall reap the whirlwind. Hosea 8:7 [ESV]

D.T. Osborn

Sources: The Holy Bible, English Standard Version, Crossway Bibles, 2001

Featured and Top Image courtesy of HarshLight’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 1 courtesy of I am R’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 2 courtesy of Kevin Harber’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 3 courtesy of Martin Deutsch’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 4 courtesy of Edward Liu’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License

All other sources linked or cited in the text

Originally published in TIL Journal

 

Struggle

Life is all about struggle.

You never live without struggle.

Life begins with a struggle.

Life ends with a struggle.

Struggle is the part of our life.

A mother struggles to give birth to her child.

Every living creature struggles for survival.

Struggle is the rule of life.

If you struggle to get something today,

Tomorrow or in your near future, you’ll receive your grand rewards.

Don’t scare to struggle.

Enjoy your struggle and hug it like your true pal.

Your grand success and victory is always waiting for you.

Source: POSITIVE THOUGHTS OF SELF-MOTIVATION! Only you can motivate yourself… Only you can bring positive changes in your life…. Birister Sharma

To Buy this Book- POSITIVE THOUGHTS OF SELF-MOTIVATION!

Thank you for reading. Let us make a beautiful world together. God bless!

Follow me On Twitter

Follow me On Facebook

COPYRIGHT © Shubham Verma

The Left and Islamofascism: A Strange and Troubling Alliance, Part One [Video]

Leftism

Much has been written here and elsewhere about the many detrimental elements that the 2019 crop of Democratic congressional rookies have brought to American society. However, there is at least one somewhat positive service these neophytes have done for the public, they have visibly revealed the mind of the activist Left.

One of the more troubling revelations that have come to light is the political and societal alliance between the far Left and Islamofascists in the United States. No, there isn’t a formal written agreement between the two groups, nor could there be one that truly states the intentions of either party, as will be seen.

However, each of these ‘movements’ has something to gain through cooperation in their fight against a common foe, the traditional, conservative Judeo-Christian society of the West. Whatever differences they may have they are unified in this immediate goal.

The Political Alliance

IslamofascismThe political alliance of the Left with Islamofascism in America began immediately following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, and the opportunity was unwittingly provided by former President George W. Bush. In a speech six days after 9/11, Bush declared that,

The face of terror is not the true faith of Islam. That’s not what Islam is all about. Islam is peace.

The naivety of President Bush was a denial of the brutal history of Islamic Jihad and its resurgence in modern times. Yet the refrain that “Islam is a religion of peace,” became the moral pedestal for the Left to the present day.

Most political conservatives at that time were approving of Bush’s call for tolerance out of a sense of solidarity and the inherent conservative tendency to place blame for evil acts on the individual perpetrators. The other side of that coin is conservatives, in general, tend to trust others until given a good reason not to trust them.

During the remainder of the Bush presidency, Islamic terrorists focused on America’s efforts in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the homefront was relatively quiet. However, that situation began to change after the ascension of Barak Obama to the Oval Office.

One of the first actions President Obama took after his inauguration was to embark upon what became known as his ‘apology tour,’ in various countries. During that international speaking jaunt, Obama routinely degraded American policy, both with dictators in places such as Cuba, and shamed our conduct of the ‘war on terror’ in Islamic nations.

LeftismPresident Obama then proceeded to initiate secretive ties to the Muslim Brotherhood around the time of the so-called ‘Arab spring,’ uprisings in Egypt during 2011. Obama supported the uprisings which were aided by the Muslim Brotherhood.

At the same time, Obama began to withdraw troops from Iraq, which quickly resulted in the rise of ISIS and their successive military conquests in the Middle East. This set the stage for the veil to be lifted on any pretense that our Commander in Chief and his cohorts were not aligning with radical Islamofascism against American interests.

The veil came off on September 11, 2012, at Benghazi, Libya. The Obama administration, in a strategic alliance with Islamic terrorism backed by Leftist political players including Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, covered up a clear Islamic attack on Americans by falsely blaming the attack on an internet video.

This horrible event cemented the troubling alliance between the political Left and Islamofascism. The stage was now set for a new crop of eager young Leftists and Muslim terror apologists to arrive in 2018.

The chief representative of the Left is, of course, the ever verbose Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez [D-NY]. The main apologist for Islamic terrorism is the slightly less infamous Representative Ilhan Omar [D-MN].

Rep. Omar has been featured in a previous article and the clear danger she poses to America was thoroughly outlined in that piece. However, there is another necessary element which supports the pernicious alliance between the Left and Islamofascism. That element is the Leftmedia.

The Leftmedia Supports Islamofascism

IslamofascismThe conglomerate of the Leftist media apparatus has shown unwavering support for the assault of Islamofascists upon Western civilization at every juncture, especially during Obama’s tenure. The pre-eminent example of this was the lack of honest coverage by the Leftmedia network outlets after the terrorist attack on Benghazi.

For the seventh night in a row, ABC’s World NewsCBS Evening News, and NBC Nightly News refused to give one single second of coverage to the Obama administration’s deceitful response to the terrorist attack on the US consulate in Benghazi on September 11.

However, there are many other examples where Islamic terrorist attacks on American soil were downplayed or dismissed altogether. One prominent example that has faded from memory, especially if one is of the millennial generation, occurred in 2009 at my former military home base of Food Hood, Texas.

U.S. Army Major Nidal Malik Hasan went on a premeditated murderous rampage at Ft. Hood on November 5, 2009. As was later uncovered, Hasan was a sympathizer with Islamofascism groups and vocally declared his allegiance to Islamic Jihad as he shot and killed 13 American soldiers.

The response of the Leftmedia was to cover-up Hasan’s clear connections to Jihadists with every lame reason they could concoct including PTSD, though Hasan never served overseas. Prominent among the fables was the Left’s favorite screed of ‘racism’ directed against Hasan which caused him to kill his fellow soldiers.

Media outlets found another convenient motive that would fit its worldview — racist U.S. soldiers drove Hasan to kill. ABC News ran a story the day after the attack titled Nidal Malik Hasan, “Suspected Fort Hood Shooter, Was Called “Camel Jockey.” This allowed the media to ignore any relationship between the attack and Islam and blame it on “racist” U.S. military personnel.

Examples such as this abound including the Leftmedia. Another example is the media blaming conservative groups like the Tea Party for the Boston Marathon bombing in 2013.

On April 15, 2013, two pressure cooker bombs exploded during the Boston Marathon, killing 3 people and injuring 264. Before the scene was even cleared, many in the media had a suspect — the Tea Party. Chris Matthews and CNN’s Wolf Blitzer attached great significance to the fact that it was Patriots Day. Michael Moorealleged that the Tea Party was behind the bombing. CNN’s security analyst Peter Bergen “suggested more than once that a right wing extremist group could be behind the attacks.”

IslamofascismFast forward to 2019 and the same Leftmedia apologists are busy excusing the anti-Semitism of Ilhan Omar. As a result of this support, the House of Representatives changed their mind about a critical resolution against anti-Semitism and instead passed a meaningless one which spoke against several categories of so-called ‘hate speech.’

Her recent characterization of 9/11 as “some people did something” rightly garnered harsh criticism. It also brought sympathetic support from some of her Democratic colleagues as well as those in the Leftmedia who said that outrage over this comment was phony and insisted the real problem was bigotry against Muslims.

This is a small sampling of the evidence that the Left in America is allied with those whose objective is to further Islamic Jihad. It is also but a fraction of the evidence seen around the globe, perhaps most notably in Europe over many decades.

Moreover, this strange alliance between the Left and Islamofascism involves one final serious participant. It is the Left wing of the ‘Christian Church’ around the globe, which will be examined in part two.

I have sent to you all my servants the prophets, sending them persistently, saying, ‘Turn now every one of you from his evil way, and amend your deeds, and do not go after other gods to serve them, and then you shall dwell in the land that I gave to you and your fathers.’ But you did not incline your ear or listen to me. Jeremiah 35:15 [ESV]

D.T. Osborn

Sources: The Holy Bible, English Standard Version, Crossway Bibles, 2001

Featured and Top image courtesy of Chris Rojas’ Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 1 courtesy of Image Editor’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 2 courtesy of Jack’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 3 courtesy of Twitter Trends 2019’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 4 courtesy of Danny Hammontree’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License

All other sources linked or cited in the text

Originally published in TIL Journal

Kuch Khwaish adhuri si…by #VirtualSiyahi

Dil kehta hai thoda thehar ja

Ek do kadam ka chalna bhi jo ab fasla sa lagta hai

Roshan hokar bhi sab na jane kyu dhua dhua sa lagta hai…

Ranjisho aur shikvo ke kisse to naye purane bikhre zamane ho gaye

milne milane ke kisse bhi ab sadiyo purane ho gaye

ab to mulaqat hoti bhi hai to bas us lamhe mein…..

Read Full Poetry Here ☟☟☟

https://wp.me/p8eSGu-IH

Media and the world by Ngobesing Suh Romanus

Many things are definitely wrong with the practice of Journalism in the world today.

What is wrong with the practice of this profession in your country?

I can guess.

The first thing that hits my mind is self interest. Many practitioners of this noble profession only say or write what will bring benefit to them. This mercenary spirit has made lies telling reporting the norm.

What is worse, many Journalists have transformed themselves into public relations officers and political propagandists at the service of the highest bidder.

Many are supporters not reporters.

A lot of them are governed by fear instead of courage. Hence, you will find many journalists who coin their reports to stay out of trouble with anyone. The indisputable result is objectivity, balanced reporting, and credibility are killed.

When journalists play the role of propagandists, tell lies shamelessly, manipulate news and report to please rather than to truthfully inform, they easily fall prey to the trap of becoming instruments of destruction in the hands of unscrupulous people.

Instead of reporting the truth which they find many reporters resort to reporting what they know their listeners would like to hear.

This has turned the instruments of mass communication into dangerous weapons of mass destruction.

The communication enterprise takes a big chunk of the blame for the so much hate, misunderstanding, negativity, intolerance, violence, wars and wanton destruction of life and property that one bears witness to in today’s world.

If this does not change, we are in for it. Humanity is headed for destruction.

The whole communication community needs to go back to the drawing board, reexamine itself and reset the rules, putting truth not lies, responsibility not irresponsibility and construction not destruction at the center of their trade.

Tell me what you think.

Transgender Tyranny Is Here

2151548269_0dc93c5515_b

Girls will be boys, and boys will be girls, it’s a mixed up, muddled up, shook up world.

Lyrics from the hit song “Lola” by The Kinks. The tune was released on June 12, 1970.

Ray Davis has claimed that he was inspired to write “Lola” after Kinks manager Robert Wace spent a night in Paris dancing with a transgender woman.

Three of the four original band members, including the composer[s] of “Lola” reformed The Kinks in June of 2018. It would be interesting to know what they think of the current socio-political push for “transgender rights,” in Western society almost 50 years later.

This journal has chronicled the devastating and dangerous movement to enshrine “transgenderism” as a basic human right on several occasions. In the past few years, advocates of this reality-denying cult have begun to quietly manipulate the legal system to their ends, especially concerning what can only be called forced transitioning of young children. 

However, before the gender ID enforcers could make meaningful legal strides, they believed they had to accomplish three things. First, left-wing academia had to be convinced to normalize ‘transgender rights’ as a health issue.

A New and Dangerous ‘Diagnosis’

transgenderismThe crucial turning point which empowered the transgender movement and helped launch it into the ‘mainstream’ of culture happened not quite six years ago. It came in a publication that most don’t know about, the Diagnostics and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders or the DSM.

 

The DSM is the ‘biblical’ authority of the psychiatric profession. It is,

published by the American Psychiatric Association (APA). In the United States, the DSM serves as the principal authority for psychiatric diagnoses. Treatment recommendations, as well as payment by health care providers, are often determined by DSM classifications, so the appearance of a new version has significant practical importance.

Until 2013, the fourth edition of the DSM was in effect. The DSM-IV classified those who believed they were ‘assigned’ the ‘wrong’ gender as suffering from Gender Identity Disorder.

As a “disorder,” it was a mental illness. Today, due to political and cultural pressure, the DSM-V calls this condition Gender Dysphoria. Such a classification is not considered a mental illness. Rather it is considered a kind of psychological discomfort and confusion. This is how mental illness can be masked as a difficult, but “normal,” reality.

The necessity of lessening the severity of what is a delusional disorder is evident. In this way, the Leftist ‘science’ community could grant ‘scientific’ credence to the notion that transgender ‘rights’ advocates represent a group of people being ‘victimized’ by the predominant culture.

Which leads to the second step to be completed for the transgender ‘rights’ advocates to be successful. That is the step of playing the victim card.

Playing the ‘Victim’ Card

In the culture war, the victim ‘card’ is the favorite choice of the Left. This card has been successfully played numerous times in the past.

The pattern of play is similar in each case. First, a group must be identified which could be characterized as ‘victims’ of some terrible abuse.

2580363763_b709cda150_qNext, the group must be canvassed somehow to isolate individuals within it who could be used to showcase their ‘victimhood’ publically. It has become all too familiar to see such an individual or even a small group in front of the cameras and microphones speaking about their tragic ‘victimization’ at the hands of evil people who are also not-so-coincidentally conservative.

This strategy accomplishes two things. It demonizes the evil conservative ‘oppressors’ while garnering pity and synthetic ‘outrage’ on behalf of the perceived ‘victim.’

Whether or not the offense against this poor ‘victim’ is true is irrelevant to the Left. There are many examples both recent and decades-old of this phenomenon.

Most recently there is the example of the hoax hate-crime orchestrated by Jussie Smollett in Chicago. The purpose here was to demonize Trump supporters while increasing Smollett’s value as a Leftist extremist and thus enriching him as an actor.

The fact that this was carried out so carelessly almost immediately revealed it was a hoax. But for the Leftmedia, that was only a slight inconvenience as they immediately labeled it a “hate crime,” with a little apology when they were proved wrong.

Smollett himself is facing some very serious charges that could result in severe punishment from the courts. He is facing 16 felony counts in Chicago as of today.

However, the penalties which are inflicted upon children in the transgender ‘rights’ cause are far more severe than Smollett’s because of the lifelong damage that could ultimately result. It is indeed tragic that children, some whose ages register in the single digits will become the true victims of adult manipulation, in the name of illusionary rights.

It is also tragic that adult transgenders cannot see their own delusion. A delusion so pervasive that it warps biological reality, and causes its adherents to lash out with tyrannical demands for all of society.

Turning Tragedy into Tyranny

transgender agendaIt is unequivocally a tragedy that for the sake of creating a phantom human ‘right’ people will not only mutilate themselves, via having body parts cut off and others sowed on, but will insist that others change their own lives to accommodate the delusion. Those who desire to live in reality are now expected to alter their speech, i.e. no unapproved pronouns allowed.

Moreover, society as a whole must now deny the exclusiveness of male and female bathrooms, lockers or dressing rooms in public areas and schools, according to trans-activists. This insanity is seeking the force of law to turn a tragic condition into a normal one.

The Leftmedia, whether on social media outlets or through the airwaves, engages in the third step which is pushing the narrative. A narrative that is dangerous to adults, and extremely dangerous for children.

Thus, the Leftmedia is less likely to report about the enabling of pedophiles through the transgender ‘rights’ movement. However, there are cases of adult male predators ‘identifying’ as female and accosting young girls in public bathrooms.

In Scotland, an 18-year-old male who identifies as a woman was given a slap on the wrist by authorities earlier this month after assaulting a 10-year-old girl in the restroom. According to The Courier, the suspect, who goes by the name Katie Dolatowski, sexually assaulted the unidentified little girl in a supermarket restroom on March 4, 2018, reportedly grabbing “the terrified youngster by the face, shov[ing] her into the cubicle and order[ing] her to remove her trousers.”

The penalty for this individual should have been some lengthy prison sentence. Instead, he was

banned from having contact with children and given community service and electronic tagging.

How can the parents of this child be assured this predator will not strike again under the guise of identifying as a female? How has the legal system not only in Scotland but in many other countries turned to favor the transgender agenda?

The short answer to that last question is twofold. One reason is the cultural acceptance of transgenderism for adults, as seen especially in the instance of Caitlyn [formerly Bruce] Jenner’s relatively recent popularity.

Secondly, trans-activists have been ‘teaching’ and promoting their cause as ‘experts’ both in the medical community and at legal conferences in various states. These disturbed ‘health’ professionals have also gained the support of the American Academy of Pediatricians in a recent statement affirming ‘transitioning’ for children.

Dr. James Cantor explained in his detailed analysis of the AAP policy statement, “almost all clinics and professional associations in the world use what’s called the watchful waiting approach to helping GD children, [but] the AAP statement rejected that consensus, endorsing only gender affirmation.

Trans-Activists Are Targeting Children

It is alarming is that trans-activists are pushing their sex-change agenda on pre-pubescent children and threatening the parents if they object. Their pernicious influence has reached even the level of state government in South Dakota.

[Last month] the Health and Human Services committee of the South Dakota House killed a bill that would have protected the right of parents to refuse to consent to medical or psychological treatment for a child suffering from gender dysphoria if the treatment “would induce, confirm, or promote the child’s belief that the child’s sex or gender identity is different from the child’s sex presented at birth.”

transgenderism

This is tyranny at a level so fierce that it promotes children not just acting against their parents’ wishes, but advocates punishing the parents with the force of law if they object. In South Dakota’s case, this means that children would not be afforded counseling unless that counseling affirmed the “child’s belief” they were somehow trapped in the wrong biological sex.

 

There are also some in America specifically targeting children as young as 4 years old. This tactic began to surface about 3 years ago in custody battles during divorce proceedings.

Dr. Michelle Cretella, executive director of the American College of Pediatricians. …“…first began hearing from distraught parents in this situation in 2016 and in 2017, I heard from seven families in as many different states in this situation. In all but one case the child was a 15 year-old girl who never had any sexual identity confusion prior to her parent’s divorce,” Cretella said. “The other case involved 4-year-old triplet boys whose mother desperately wanted a girl. The mother was a psychologist herself and had cross-dressed one of the boys for two years, insisting that it was his idea. In each of the seven cases the guardian ad litems and judges removed the right to medical consent and/or custody from the parent who objected to transition with puberty blockers and hormones.”

Puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones are not well-studied and thus the harmful side effects are also not well-known. The physical damage of these potent and potentially dangerous drugs was not considered by the judges or the mother in this case.

The state of California has decided to tyrannically bypass the concern of parents and the judgment of the courts. This was accomplished by passing an insidious law affirming transgendered treatment for children as young as 12 in foster care without the caregiver’s knowledge.

[In California] you only need to be 12 years old to privately seek and consent to treatment for gender transitioning.

However, California decided to go even further by also requiring the taxpayers to foot the bill for this absurdity, whether they like it or not. In one section the new law states,

All children in foster care, as well as former foster youth up to 26 years of age, are entitled to Medi-Cal coverage without cost share or income or resource limits. The Medi-Cal program provides transition-related health care services when those services are determined to be medically necessary.

As has been chronicled in this journal and in many others, such ‘transition-related’ treatments, I will not call this ‘health care,’ are never necessary for children. Many studies have shown that 75-95% of children and adolescents lose these feelings of gender confusion when they become adults.

Once a person is an adult, the choice to poison and mutilate themselves because they deny reality is their own individual, if unwise, choice. That is, provided that choice does not make unreasonable demands on others to also deny biological reality with their speech and with public accommodations.

However, there is no right of choice allowing adults to manipulate children who have not yet matured mentally into life-altering and dangerous gender “affirming” actions. Nor should the law uphold and force such tyrannical nonsense upon society while endangering children in the process.

See that you do not despise one of these little ones. For I tell you that in heaven their angels always see the face of my Father who is in heaven. Matthew 18:10 [ESV]

D.T. Osborn

Sources: The Holy Bible, English Standard Version, Crossway Bibles, 2001

Featured and Top Image courtesy of caseywest’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 1 courtesy of Jonathan Oakley’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 2 courtesy of melissa jonas’ Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 3 courtesy of Adam Jones Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 4 courtesy of MaX’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License

All other sources linked or cited in the text.

Originally published in TIL Journal

Intentional Immigration Ignorance, Part Two: A Wall Is Not Enough [Video]

Illegal Immigration

In part one we saw that building a physical barrier on America’s southern border is a wise and moral action to confront the invasion of illegal aliens into the country. However, though it is wise and moral, building a border wall, even a wall that completely halted illegal entry, would not be enough.

There are two additional measures that must be taken to halt the illegal immigration threat. Moreover, they must be taken quickly lest the nation is overwhelmed.

Asylum Law Must Change

The primary task is changing the asylum law in the United States. This must happen because no wall will stop this avenue of invasion.

Current law is a different version of the ‘catch and release’ method made famous in the Obama presidency.  The policy was originally created because of a court settlement during former President Bill Clinton’s administration.

At the time, it began with a Federal court ruling requiring Law Enforcement to briefly detain, and then release unaccompanied minors who show up at the border. They could be released to parents, other relatives, or into a licensed care giver’s hands.

If that was impossible,

As a last resort, U.S. officials may place children in the “least restrictive” setting available.

Illegal ImmigrationThe policy was also used liberally by the George W. Bush administration during the early 2000s until they halted the practice in 2008. President Obama reinstated and expanded the ‘catch and release’ policy in 2016, and under that reinstatement, anyone who could convince the Border Patrol they qualified for asylum would be released into the United States.

President Trump attempted to halt this with an executive order and, predictably, a Federal court in San Francisco blocked it. However, the President had something up his sleeve for just such an eventuality.

the Trump Administration has quietly negotiated an agreement with Mexico that effectively circumvents US courts to implement one of Trump’s biggest immigration-policy wins so far: A plan that will keep Central American applicants for asylum in the US on the Mexican side of the border while their claims are processed.

The agreement is not yet in force, however, it is only a temporary solution. Moreover, it doesn’t address applicants from countries outside of Central America that are showing up at the border in increasing numbers.

Basically, this is how it works today. When a family group, usually a woman with children, shows up at the border, they must do two things. First, they must surrender to the Border Patrol.

Illegal ImmigrationSecond, they must claim or apply for asylum. To qualify for asylum they must show a “credible fear,” of severe danger from their home countries.

Those who claim domestic violence or extreme poverty do not qualify for asylum. There is no such animal as ‘economic’ asylum.

Once this is accomplished, the family is released with an order to appear in court and have their asylum claim adjudicated. As you might have guessed, most don’t appear.

In fact, over 90% don’t make their court date. They aren’t tracked during the time until the day of their asylum hearing because, until their scheduled appearance, they are not considered in violation of the law.

It can be two years or more between illegal entry and the date of the asylum hearing, giving newcomers ample time to disappear into the interior of the country. This along with the increasing humanitarian crisis at the border prove the President right in declaring a National Emergency.

These facts have not escaped the attention of those whose interests lie with the illegal invasion. The word has been out south of the border, and people are taught to show up, with a child, surrender and even told the proper words to say to be able to claim asylum.

Moreover, the invitation to flood the border was practically given to Central America by the statements and policies of the Obama administration.

The Obama government and its media puppets celebrate the decline in border apprehension numbers from 2014 to 2015 as a sign of “success,” while they are silent on the Border Patrol policies that deliberately discourage Border Patrol officers from apprehending border jumpers. Those anti-enforcement policies are numerous, but some are downright unbelievable:  Would you believe the government’s Customs and Border Patrol official agency website has a section devoted to telling illegal border crossers how to avoid capture?
Would you believe that website also advises illegal aliens how to file a complaint against the Border Patrol or its sister agency, Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE), if they were apprehended in violation of the published rules of engagement?

A long-term change to this legal and virtually open-border situation must happen soon.

However, there is one other action that must happen even sooner. It is imperative that the southern border be closed, as quickly as possible.

The Border Must Be Closed

Illegal ImmigrationWhile changing the law is primary, the most urgent step that must be taken if America is to survive the crushing wave of illegal immigration currently underway is to close the border. That is the only way to create enough time for a real change in immigration law to be enacted and take effect.

The numbers of border apprehensions have greatly increased during the first two months of 2019, and the immediate prognosis is for even larger numbers of illegal aliens to inundate the border.

According to the statistics from the CBP [Customs and Border Protection], in the fiscal year of 2018,  migrants held between the ports of entry totaled 521,090. In FY2019 so far, the total is 318,407 and the year is only a third of the way along!

Each fiscal year runs from October to September of the following calendar year. America is on pace to more than double FY2018’s total in 2019.

In other words, should the pace continue at the current speed, border apprehensions will easily exceed 1 million, making it close to 2 million illegal aliens invading in the past two years alone! Thus, President Trump was correct in declaring the situation a National Emergency.

To his credit, the President seems to have also recognized the necessity of closing the border. He has threatened to do so on more than one occasion.

The latest warning about closing the border came via a tweet in December of 2018.

Donald J. Trump

@realDonaldTrump

…..close the Southern Border. Bring our car industry back into the United States where it belongs. Go back to pre-NAFTA, before so many of our companies and jobs were so foolishly sent to Mexico. Either we build (finish) the Wall or we close the Border……

49.8K people are talking about this

However, I believe the President may be waiting too long to start the process of closing the border. I submit that his reasoning should not be an insistence on building the wall or closing the border.

Instead, it is more prudent to first close the border so that the wall can be finished. Both building the wall and changing the asylum laws should be done before the border is reopened.

The Window of Opportunity Is Closing Fast

Many people have been hoodwinked by the false narratives of the Left concerning illegal immigration. Perhaps the worst of these has been the ongoing claim that there are around 11 million illegal immigrants living in the United States.

This claim has been around for a long time. It has also been a fiction for a long time.

Closer to reality is a September 2018 study conducted at Yale University on the subject.

Professors at Yale University have roiled the immigration debate with a new study calculating there are between 16 million and 30 million illegal immigrants in the U.S. — as much as three times more than most demographers figure. The professors’ model looked at estimates of how many people came illegally, and how many people likely left, and concluded there are a lot more people who arrived than the 11 million suggested by traditional estimates. The model says the most likely figure is double that, at about 22 million.

However, 22 million is actually a very conservative figure, in fact, too conservative. The upper limit of the numbers estimated, 30 million, is an undercount as well.

New Migrant Caravan – G. Arjas/AFP/Getty

The Yale study got one thing correct. The 11 million official figure, still used by the U.S. Census Department, is a fiction. However, they were missing two key facts in their analysis, and there was no way to account for those facts.

First of all, we do not know how many people are in America illegally because of overstaying their visa. Those with visas are not tracked as they are already here legally until their visa expires.

Second, and most revealing of all is this bit of information. Neither Yale nor anyone else can know the total of those who were not apprehended.

Remember, these extreme numbers of more than 1 million count only those who are caught by the Border Patrol, not those who got away. The Border Patrol used to do official estimates of the numbers of those who got away.

For years, the Border Patrol (BP) officially used to report the “gotaway” rate, those who “got away” from apprehension.  For decades, it was felt that on a “good day,” the Border Patrol caught one in five illegal aliens, on a “bad day,” the number was one in seven.

However, that all stopped during the Obama administration. This policy change occurred in August of 2016.

Obama’s Border Patrol has officially abandoned the use of the “Gotaway” number in weekly and quarterly reports of apprehensions. For decades, the Border Patrol routinely compiled and reported the Gotaway number as a supplement to the number of actual apprehensions.

By applying the additional variables of those who leave and repeat offenders, a more accurate number has been estimated by retired Border Patrol chiefs at 40 to 50 million illegals in the United States today.

This is an astounding number, but it is far closer to reality than most want to admit. And it is getting larger by leaps and bounds every day.

It is no longer a question of stopping an invasion of illegal aliens because we have already been invaded by millions of them, many of whom are not loyal to America or respectful of her laws. The immediate question now is how to stop the number from getting simply too large to cope with, even in the currently ‘rich’ U.S.A.

The wisdom of the prudent is to discern his way, but the folly of fools is deceiving. Proverbs 14:8 [ESV]

D. T. Osborn

Sources: The Holy Bible, English Standard Version, Crossway Bibles, 2001

Featured and Top Image courtesy of Alosh Bennett’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 1 courtesy of cfpereda’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 2 courtesy of Takver’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 3 courtesy of Chris Blakeley’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 4 by G. Arjas/AFP/Getty Images

All other sources linked or cited in the text

Originally published in TIL Journal

A strongly worded letter to the media

Dear Media,

What is wrong with you?
Are you to build or to destroy?
Do you know your role or you don’t know it?
See all the harm you cause
In the world;
The lies you tell;
The sensation
The conflicts you fan;
Are you aware of what you are doing?
Is it money you run after
Or popularity or service to the people?

Please, reader,
Add something
To this letter;
I am so angry
I can’t continue
To write;
Let’s put our heads together
And complete this letter
And send to the media;
Let them know what we think; you must be aware of their madness.
Nonsense!
Thank you!
Have you sent in your contribution to:

A strongly worded letter to poverty?

A strongly worded letter to Liars?