A Different Way To Look At “Illegal”

How to read the news

Here is a different way to look at illegal immigration. I saw a post from Dan Rather the other day about how Spanish speaking people rescuing others from Houston shouldn’t be thought of as anything other than American. Sure, why not? I mean, assuming they actually are Americans.  If the President of Mexico offers aid to Houstonians, we don’t automatically grant him citizenship.

The problem is that the Left has defined the debate. On their terms “citizen” means “white dude”. Immigrant means “Hispanic (regardless of citizenship)”. Illegal immigrant means you are simply a racist, privileged white dude for using that term. Nobody is “illegal”. They are “human”.  Right?

Instead of using the often confused terms of immigrant and illegal immigrant, let’s replace those terms with “Taxpayer” and “Tax Cheat”. After all, that’s what an illegal immigrant has done. They have cheated on their paperwork, or not filed at all. See how the stories change in that context.

Take today, there is a story about how immigrants are battling detection and deportation after Harvey. Really? We are deporting citizens because they emigrated to the USA? No, they mean illegal immigrants, but nobody is illegal so that is a racist term. Let’s try this instead, “Tax cheats battle detection and IRS penalties after Harvey”. Still feel so much sympathy?

Trump considers ending the Dream Act (which wasn’t actually an act, just a regulation) for children of immigrants. What? We are deporting citizen children because their parents came here legally from other countries??  No, of course not.  But again, illegal immigrant is a racist term used by citizens (privileged white dudes). So let’s try it differently. Trump considers crackdown on tax cheats filing illegitimate child tax credit claims. Ah, suddenly it doesn’t sound so bad.

So that’s the assignment. If you see an article that says “immigrant” but means “illegal immigrant”, just substitute “tax cheat”. If you see an article that says “immigrant” and means “legal citizen who emigrated”, read it “taxpayer”.

By the way, if you think this is a ridiculous idea just remember that anyone who is here illegally is either dodging taxes, committing identity theft, or filing the wrong return. Most are paid under the table or with a false tax ID. The reason businesses use their labor is because they are illegally paid less than minimum wage and don’t operate under the same overtime and labor laws that citizens…sorry, taxpayers do. So if you read every story in that lens, taxpayer and tax cheat, you won’t be that far off.

Advertisements

Yes, There Is Evidence of Voter Fraud

…And 3 million is a rational estimate

Fake news alert. “No evidence of illegal alien voter fraud” = #fakenews.  Many media outlets have once again dumped any caveats or explanations and straight to the claim that there is absolutely no evidence that illegal aliens vote.  That’s not true.  If the question is whether there were enough to give Hillary the popular vote victory, the answer is there is not enough evidence at this point to state that dogmatically.  
However, there is plenty of evidence that a significantly large number of non-citizens vote, and that there are enough fraudulent and inaccurate registrations to go the distance.  Anything beyond those facts is partisan speculation.  Of this, both Trump and the main stream media are guilty.
 
According to a study by Old Dominion University and George Mason University, 6.4% of non-citizens in the US voted in the 2008 election, and 2.2% voted in the 2010 midterm. At the time that accounted for about 1.6 million votes from non-citizens.
 
In order to believe that there was no influence from non-citizen voters in 2016, we would have to assume that either the number of illegal aliens and resident aliens in the US dropped during Obama’s presidency, the rate at which they vote has dropped from 6.4% over the last 8 years despite court rulings striking down voter ID laws, or that more illegal aliens and resident aliens were inclined to vote FOR Donald Trump than they were for Mitt Romney or John McCain.
 
Hillary won the popular vote by about 2.8 million. Assuming the same stats on illegal aliens as in 2008, as many as 1.6 million of those votes could have been non-citizens.
 
On top of that, Pew noted that there are 1.8 million dead voters still registered and 2.75 million people registered in multiple states.  Their research showed that 24 million registrations in the US are invalid or inaccurate.  Project Veritas released undercover videos during the 2016 campaign where Democrat operative Scott Foval described their long practice of bussing voters across state lines to vote.
If the question is whether or not 3 million illegal aliens voted, there is no specific evidence to show that number.  Is 3 million outside the realm of speculation?  I guess you would have to ask if twice as many of the 20+ million illegal aliens and non-citizens living in the US were motivated to vote against Trump.
Is there evidence that there could have been enough non-citizens, dead people, and fraudulently registered voters to cover the popular vote difference?  The answer is yes.

Trump vs. The Media

Why they are losing and how they can win again

On October 10 before a national debate with Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump pulled off the prank of the century on the media.  Dogged by an old video of Trump saying horrible, demeaning things about women, he invited the press to a meeting to discuss it and apologize.

When they arrived, Trump had a panel set up.  He was there with four women from the Clintons’ past.  Juanita Broaddrick was a woman Bill Clinton had raped, Kathleen Willey and Paula Jones were two women Clinton had sexually harassed and assaulted, and Kathy Shelton was a lawyer who had represented a child rape victim in a case Hillary Clinton cheated to win for the defendant.  The war between Trump and the media was on, and Trump was up 1-0.

In a recent Washington Post article, they recognized Trump’s constant victories over the media and lamented how they really don’t know what to do about it.  Obama went as far as to blame Trump’s victory on bars and restaurants that play Fox News.  In fact, their recent attempt to marginalize competing news sources by labeling them as “fake” has become a parody itself as more information is released by Wikileaks showing how the mainstream media sent the Clinton campaign debate questions ahead of time, let them edit articles, and apologized if they thought an article was too harsh on her.

voting-boothWhile the Washington Post was calling out the “fake” right wing media for making claims that 3 million illegal aliens hacked the election by voting illegally, the New York Times was claiming that Putin and the Russians hacked the election by distributing fake news, hacking DNC emails, and possibly even interfering with the voting booths themselves. You can now identify which way a fake news source leans just by looking at who they think stole 2016.  This works for everyone from CNN and NYT to Fox News and Breitbart.

How do the mainstreams fix this and get back on the path to being trusted and having political influence?  It might help if they sought a truce.  The media has a very adversarial relationship with Trump.  On July 23, the Huffington Post put out a piece about how to defeat Trump. Disgraced, yet highly respected journalist Dan Rather said the media must do what he did to Bush and be more biased to beat Trump. The media that ignored Joe Biden for 8 years now has 24 hour surveillance on Trump’s Twitter account just waiting for a gaffe to jump on.

When Trump saved 1,000 jobs at Carrier, the media congratulated themselves for finding a silver lining in something Trump had done.  Then of course they predictably changed their minds on the deal labeling it an empty PR stunt that encourages crony capitalism.  It’s funny how Obama hasn’t even left office yet and suddenly stimulus, crony capitalism, and picking winners and losers is a bad thing again.

For the mainstream media to win again, it would help if they weren’t so obviously biased. They have become so predictable that we almost wonder if Trump says some of the more crazy things he says on purpose.  A prime example came this past week when Trump tweeted that flag burners should maybe get a year in jail.  Predictably, the media went crazy.  Typically blind NPR went running back to the 1980s to criticize Trump for making the same unconstitutional error that George HW Bush made.  In the process they skipped 2005 when Hillary Clinton co-sponsored a bill to put flag burners in jail for a year.  This of course has us all curious if Trump knew about Clinton’s bill, or if he just got extremely lucky.

If the media wants to beat Trump, they need to stop trying.  They need to go back to what they learned in journalism school and seek fact rather than substantiation of their truth. They need to ask questions again. Skepticism is a lost art.  A little balance wouldn’t hurt either.  CNN may be making a game changing move in their attempts to bring Megyn Kelly on board.

If they keep trying to be the propaganda wing of the Democrat party, Trump is going to keep beating them.