90 Miles From Tyranny

Monday, April 8, 2019

The Case for Trump and a Look at 2020

The Case for Trump by the political and military scholar Victor Davis Hanson is a book dedicated to the "Deplorables." It is a fact-based analysis of why Donald Trump was able to win the presidency in 2016. Beyond that, Hanson sat down with American Thinker and discussed the presidential election in 2020.

Donald Trump ran against both political parties and the East Coast establishment in the 2016 presidential election. He was the first man ever elected to the nation's highest office without prior experience in government, politics, or the military. In a nutshell, Trump appealed to a forgotten but sizable portion of the population: the working and middle classes most negatively impacted by decades of globalism. Through direct quotes from various individuals on both sides, Hanson makes a powerful case that the elite of both parties hold immense disdain for these middle Americans.

Hanson told American Thinker, "He was not supposed to win. With the victory, he interrupted sixteen years of a planned progressive agenda. This election was a referendum on prior credibility. His victory meant all those who were consulted in the past would be isolated because Trump was not necessarily going to listen to those in the World Bank, the Brookings Institution, Hoover Institution where I work, and the Council on Foreign Affairs, nor was he going to call past presidents for advice. This was an affront to the entire political establishment."

Before Trump, Republicans and conservatives usually did not take the initiative, nor did they go on the offense. "Trump did just the opposite. His aggression was very popular among the frustrated Republican voters. They did not want a John McCain or a Mitt Romney whose often passive attitude they saw as a cancer. McCain had ignored attacking Reverend Wright and his outrageous comments, while Romney never really objected to what 'moderator' Candy Crowley did in the second debate. Conservative voters were ready for someone who fights back. They might not like all Trump's wild comments and tweeting, but they thought Trump's combative attitude was worth it."

Hanson went on to explain that many voters saw Trump as authentic. Regardless of what audience he was speaking to, he always wore a suit and a tie. "He never adopted a southern accent when speaking to voters in that region as Hillary Clinton did, or changed his tone when speaking to the inner city as Barack Obama had, or wore jeans and a flannel shirt at state fairs as Joe Biden did. Even though he is a multibillionaire, people found Trump more authentic and empathetic. For example, after Hillary Clinton said she wanted to shut down the coal industry, he went into West Virginia and said he loved the 'big and beautiful coal.' He also gives straight answers, not the 50-50 type, such as 'on the one hand, in theory, maybe we will take a look at that, that is a good question to explore.'"

Fast-forwarding to 2020, Hanson believes that Trump's track record is pretty good. He is creating economic opportunity through growth, redressing longstanding trade inequities, reducing costly and poorly conceived overseas entanglements, cutting red tape that restricts business activity, and restricting illegal immigration that threatens...

The Washington Post Grossly Understates the Crime Rate of Illegal Immigrants

The Washington Post has published a blatant falsehood in support of the claim that illegal immigrants are less likely to commit serious imprisonable crimes than people born in the United States. Furthermore, the Post ignores data from the Census Bureau, Department of Justice, and Homeland Security that proves the polar opposite is true. These straightforward, comprehensive facts reveal that illegal immigrants are much more likely to commit such crimes.

A Innocent Mistake or Deliberate Deception?

In a recent “fact check” of President Trump, Glenn Kessler, Salvador Rizzo, and Meg Kelly of the Post contend that Trump “exaggerates the link between immigration and crime.” As proof of this, they write that “almost all research shows legal and illegal immigrants are less likely to commit crimes than the native-born population.”

The hyperlink above leads to their supposed evidence, an earlier article by Rizzo that makes a simple but major error. It compares the number of non-citizen immigrants in prison to the total number of immigrants in the United States. This is misleading because non-citizens only account for about half of all immigrants. The other half are immigrants who have become U.S. citizens.

The Post’s mix-up, quoted below, misleadingly compares a subset of immigrants to the larger population of all immigrants:

Excluding five states that did not provide data, state and federal correctional facilities in 2016 housed 1.3 million prisoners, of which 83,556, or 6 percent, were noncitizens, according to the latest BJS [Bureau of Justice Statistics] report. The total immigrant population stood at 43.7 million in 2016, or 13.5 percent, according to Census data.

A comparison of these figures shows that noncitizens are … far below their share of the population when combining both state and federal prisons (6 percent).

According to the Census Bureau’s “Fact Finder” — the same source the Post uses to obtain population data for all immigrants — 22.5 million non-citizens lived in the U.S. during 2016, or 7.0 percent of the U.S. population. This is close to the 6 percent share of the prison population comprised of non-citizens. It is not “far below” it, as the Postclaims.

That one percentage point difference evaporates in light of the fact that the BJS reportcited by the Post says that “some states likely provided undercounts” of non-citizen prisoners. As the Congressional Research Service reported in 2016: “Until recently, the proportion of noncitizens incarcerated in U.S. prisons and jails corresponded closely to that of noncitizens in the U.S. population, but unreported incarceration data since 2013 has hindered such comparisons.”

It’s possible this is just an innocent mistake by the Post, but Just Facts alerted the paper’s head “fact checker” and its corrections editor to this falsehood on February 8, 2019. Nearly two months later, the article has not been fixed. Moreover, if the Post corrected this, it would completely undermine the narrative of its fact check.
The Rest of the Story

The Post’s “Standards and Ethics“ declare that “no story is fair if it omits facts of major importance or significance.” Yet, its fact check does this four times. And in every case — the omission downplays the crime rates of illegal immigrants.

First, the Post omits the fact that the incarceration rate of non-citizens drastically understates their criminality. This is because the U.S. deports masses of non-citizen criminal convicts every year, thus reducing the number who remain in the country. In the decade from 2006–2015, the U.S. deported an average of 150,000 non-citizens per year who were convicted of committing crimes in the United States. This is about equal to the 145,896 non-citizens in adult correctional facilities in 2016. Since most criminals are repeat offenders, this continual mass deportation of non-citizen criminals means that the crime rate of non-citizens who come to the U.S. is much higher than those who remain in the U.S.

Put another way, if the U.S. deported the same number of criminals as its entire prison population every year for a decade, the nation’s crime rate would plummet. This is exactly what it does with non-citizens. And yet, their incarceration rate is about the same as the general U.S. population.

Second, the Post omits the fact that the incarceration rate of illegal immigrants is much higher than that of non-citizens. This is because roughly half of all non-citizensare legal immigrants who must pass a criminal background check in order to immigrate. Hence, these are a select pool of law-abiding people. The federal government doesn’t isolate the incarceration rate of legal non-citizens, but the incarceration rate of immigrant citizens, who must pass a full FBI background check, is 79 percent lower than the general U.S. population. Mixing legal and illegal non-citizens into a single incarceration rate causes the low crime rates of legal immigrants to obscure the high crime rates of illegal immigrants. Near the end of its fact check, the Post quotes the author of a study who raises this point, but the Post dismisses the...

Joe Biden ‘Steered $1.8 Billion’ to Ukraine While His Son Bagged ‘Sweetheart Deal’ from Their Government

Joe Biden Was Spotted At Macy's....

Don't Worry Kids.....Joe Biden Isn't Allowed In Here Any More...

Mamma's Don't Let Your Babies Go Anywhere Near Joe Biden...

SECRET EMPIRES: Joe Biden’s Son’s Firm Struck Billion-Dollar Deal with the Chinese Government 10 Days After Biden Trip to China

Joe Biden - A Hands On Kind Of Guy...

Fifty Shades Of Biden..

Howie confronts Joe Biden about touching children on CSPAN LIVE at LIU

Former Secret Service Agent Claims Joe Biden Would Regularly Grope Female Agents and Guests

Creepy Joe Isn't Worried About 30 Years From Now....

US gymnast breaks both legs in career-ending accident (GRAPHIC VIDEO)

US gymnast Samantha Cerio has announced her retirement from sport after sustaining a gruesome injury during the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) Baton Rouge Regional event.

Cerio, who represented Auburn University, was severely injured during her floor routine, breaking both of her legs after a catastrophic landing on a gym mat.

The gymnast was just in the beginning of her floor routine when she attempted a handspring double front flip with a blind landing on her first tumbling pass and landed awkwardly on the mat with her legs going backwards.

WARNING: THIS VIDEO CONTAINS GRAPHIC FOOTAGE THAT SOME MAY FIND DISTURBING

Unable to move following the horrific landing, Cerio was screaming and crying in agony before tournament officials and teammates rushed to...

It’s a good day for those who have been waiting for the slow wheels of justice to turn on those in the Obama administration for their roles in the handling of the Trump-Russia investigation.

Today Rep. Devin Nunes, Republican from California and ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, announced he is ready to send eight criminal referrals to the Justice Department and the Attorney General. He has been teasing such referrals for months, but said that there were delays as investigators kept coming up with more individuals who may be involved in the crimes. This week he expects to pass the information that has been uncovered to the DOJ.

This dramatic and welcome development comes with Republicans forcefully pushing for release of documents that can shed light on the origin and spread of the Trump-Russia hoax. The President recently stated that he would release all of the FBI FISA applications aimed at surveilling one of his aides, as well as other documents.

Appearing on Fox’s Sunday Morning Futures with Maria Bartiromo, Nunes talked about alleged misconduct during the Trump collusion imbroglio. He said that the referrals will be for leaks of classified information to the media, for manipulating intelligence, and for misleading FISA court judges with regard to the largely debunked Steele dossier.

Nunes was not about to reveal names of Obama officials involved in the referrals, but he did state that there are five government officials he believes lied to or misled Congress or leaked classified material.

Indicating he has been working on the referrals investigation for more than two years, Nunes said that, as time drew near when he was ready, he decided to wait for the confirmation of Attorney General William Barr.

“We’re prepared this week to notify the attorney general that we’re prepared to send those referrals over,” Nunes said. “First of all, all of these are classified or sensitive … Five of them are what I would call straight-up referrals–so just referrals that name someone and name the specific crimes. Those crimes are lying to Congress, misleading Congress, leaking classified information. So five of them are those types.”

“There are three (referrals) that I think are more complicated,” he added. So on the first one, is FISA abuse and other matters. We believe there was a conspiracy to lie to the FISA court, mislead the FISA court by numerous individuals that all need to be investigated and looked at that, and we believe the (pertinent) statute is the conspiracy statute. The second conspiracy one is involving manipulation of ...