53percenter's Blog

Before any problem can be solved, it has to be understood.

A doctor can’t treat a sick patient without having a pretty good idea of what is wrong, and how bad the situation is.

An engineer can’t repair a broken machine without knowing what went wrong in the first place, and understanding what needs to be changed.

Countless politicians on both sides of the political aisle have tossed around ideas for how to deal with America’s illegal immigration problem. The left wants to shrug off the negatives and give aliens driver’s licenses — and then let them vote, of course.

The right wants to keep immigration controlled, and welcome good people who are honest while limiting the number of lawbreakers pouring across the border.

TRENDING: Report: GOP Rolls Out Its Own Demands in Fiery Counteroffer to Kavanaugh Accuser

All of the different proposals are based on rough estimates of how many immigrants are already in America … but what if those past estimates were very, very wrong?

That’s the question that researchers at Yale University are now asking.

On Friday, a detailed study about U.S. immigration was released, and its conclusions are challenging past assumptions about immigration numbers.

Shockingly, researchers found that the accepted number of undocumented immigrants living in the U.S. — 11.3 million — may be extremely low. The actual number of aliens in America could be twice that amount.

“At the center (of the debate) lies a fairly stable and largely unquestioned number: 11.3 million undocumented immigrants residing in the U.S.,” explained Yale Insights.

“But a paper by three Yale-affiliated researchers suggests … the actual population of undocumented immigrants residing in the country is much larger than that, perhaps twice as high, and has been underestimated for decades,” the Yale publication continued.

Researchers poured over the available data like deportations and visa overstays, and used mathematical modeling to consider how many illegal immigrants have actually entered the country. This has historically been hard to pin down, since those migrants are, well, undocumented.

“(R)esearchers estimate there are 22.1 million undocumented immigrants in the United States,” Yale Insights reported.

RELATED: NYT Misleads Again – The US Did Not ‘Lose’ 1,500 Children

That’s the mean number, meaning it could be a bit less or even more than that level. But even when they made their models very strict, the estimated number of aliens was several million higher than previously thought.

“Even using parameters intentionally aimed at producing an extremely conservative estimate, they found a population of 16.7 million undocumented immigrants,” stated the report.

It’s interesting to note that the researchers went into the study expecting to discover that the oft-cited 11.3 million number was actually high. They found the opposite.

“Our original idea was just to do a sanity check on the existing number,” said Professor Edward Kaplan of the Yale School of Management. “Instead of a number which was smaller, we got a number that was 50% higher. That caused us to scratch our heads.”

The researchers were quick to point out that they do not believe there was a sudden surge of border crossers which boosted the number. Instead, they think that the real number of illegal immigrants has been under-reported for a very long time.

“It’s really something that happened in the past and maybe was not properly counted or documented,” explained Professor Jonathan Feinstein.

The Yale researchers were careful to deal with statistics and not politics, but it’s worth asking whether the real number of illegal immigrants was purposely kept under wraps for so many years because it flies in the face of past liberal promises.

After all, it was Democrat “hero” Ted Kennedy who pledged in 1965: “Our cities will not be flooded with a million immigrants annually. Under the proposed bill, the present level of immigration remains substantially the same.”

Instead, immigration surged, and that’s without even factoring in the illegal aliens who may have been dramatically under-counted for decades.

It’s time to take a long, hard look at the real immigration issues facing America. Before anything can be fixed, we need to tell the truth about the problem … and that starts with actually having honest numbers about how many people have crossed the border and never left.

We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.

The Senate’s 93-7 approval vote for H.R. 6157: Department of Defense and Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education Appropriations Act, 2019 was met with President Donald Trump’s disapproval.

Trump lashed out on Twitter:

I want to know, where is the money for Border Security and the WALL in this ridiculous Spending Bill, and where will it come from after the Midterms? Dems are obstructing Law Enforcement and Border Security. REPUBLICANS MUST FINALLY GET TOUGH!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 20, 2018

The Associated Press reported that the bill is “a wide-ranging, $854 billion bill that funds the military and a host of civilian agencies for the next year and provides a short-term fix to keep the government open through early December. The measure includes $675 billion for the Defense Department and boosts military pay by 2.6 percent, the largest pay raise in nine years.”

It also noted that, “The bill also approves spending for Health and Human Services, Education, Labor and other agencies, including a 5 percent boost for the National Institutes of Health.” The House is expected to also approve it ahead of the September 30 deadline to avoid a government shutdown.

TRENDING: Dana Loesch Destroys Joy Behar over Truth About Dianne Feinstein

Notably, funding for the border wall got punted, according to Fox News.

“Republican congressional leaders have said they would prefer to tackle the border wall after the midterms in November. The appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security will be handled after Dec. 7, where the money for the wall would be set.”

Trump had, just days earlier, called out Republicans over border wall funding. He warned them about “being played” by Democrats:

When will Republican leadership learn that they are being played like a fiddle by the Democrats on Border Security and Building the Wall? Without Borders, we don’t have a country. With Open Borders, which the Democrats want, we have nothing but crime! Finish the Wall!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 15, 2018

Despite that, 45 Republicans sided with 47 Democrats and one Independent to pass the legislation. Only six Republicans voted against the measure, joining one Independent, Sen. Bernie Sanders.

Only 6 R’s including @SenSasse, @SenMikeLee, & @RandPaul voted against excessive/wasteful spending:

$15M to natural gas vehicles
$18M R&D for HVAC/refrigeration systems
$20M wind test facilities
$20M truck efficiency program
$4M to steel industry#ampFWhttps://t.co/jT3UhtTaF6

— FreedomWorks (@FreedomWorks) September 18, 2018

Other senators also voted against the bill. They include Republicans Jeff Flake, Pat Toomey, and David Perdue.

.@POTUS is fed up with the Democrats’ historic obstructionism. Frankly, so am I. It’s time to get the government on a process where we can fund our priorities & get this President’s agenda accomplished. pic.twitter.com/3GSR0oXh6h

— David Perdue (@sendavidperdue) September 20, 2018

The Chicago Tribune wrote that following Trump’s threat to never again sign another omnibus bill, Congress has been working to break down spending bills and get them completed much faster. This was reflected in a statement from Sen. Roy Blunt, R-Mo., a senior Appropriations Committee member:

RELATED: NYT Misleads Again – The US Did Not ‘Lose’ 1,500 Children

“Today’s bill reflects the prorities (sic) I think of both sides of the Capitol and both sides of the aisle. It also fulfills, by the way, the president’s demand that he doesn’t want any more of the omnibus spending bills.”

According to The Hill, Republican Sen. Mitch McConnell echoed that sentiment. “These milestones may sound like inside baseball, but what they signify is a Senate that is getting its appropriations process back on track, a Senate that is attending to vital priorities for our country.”

Fox News reported that back in July McConnell made it clear that border wall funding would have to wait until after the mid-terms. So while Congress seems willing to work with Trump on passing funding bills in a more timely, responsible manner, when it comes to the border wall funding, there still seems to be issues.

Trump told Fox News’ Pete Hegseth at a rally in Billings, Montana that he understood the desire to wait to fund the wall until after the midterms. “If it were up to me I’d shut down the government over border security in a second. But I don’t want to do anything that is going to hurt us or potentially hurt us because I have a feeling that Republicans are going to do very well.”

Fox News went on to write that Trump had “commitments” from both McConnell and Speaker of the House Paul Ryan to take care of the border wall funding immediately after the midterm elections.

How well they keep that commitment will be partially dependent upon how the elections turn out. A “blue wave” shifting control within Congress could make such a commitment impossible to keep.

We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.

A bus driver in France is facing disciplinary action from his employer after he took disciplinary action of his own against a 12-year-old boy who crossed in front of his bus and nearly caused a terrible accident.

But Fox News reported that a petition is being circulated in support of the driver — who slapped the boy across the face and chewed him out as a parent would do — that has already gained more than 300,000 signatures.

The incident reportedly occurred on Sept. 13 in Arcueil, a suburb south of Paris, during which the driver was forced to slam on his brakes after the young man ran across the street right in front of him toward a crowd of other students waiting at a bus stop.

The driver exited his bus, walked straight toward the pre-teen and slapped him hard across the face as the other students screamed and yelled, issuing a few choice words to the boy prior to getting back on his bus.

TRENDING: Report: GOP Rolls Out Its Own Demands in Fiery Counteroffer to Kavanaugh Accuser

The video of the incident was initially posted to Snapchat prior to being posted to other social media sites, and has been viewed on Facebook more than 1.2 million times.

The BBC reported that the driver told the boy to pay more attention to his surroundings to which the boy is reported to have replied, “Shut up, go on, move on,” which is believed to have prompted the slap.

The boy’s mother reportedly filed an official complaint against the driver and the incident caused the Paris transportation authority, known as the RATP, to launch an investigation and disciplinary proceedings against the driver.

The state-owned public transport company said in a statement that they condemned the driver’s actions because they violated the principles and values held by the company, though the company did note that the driver had expressed regret over his behavior, which he blamed on an emotional reaction to a tense situation.

Euronews reported that the petition in support of the driver was started by the driver’s fellow colleagues at RATP, and it asks that the company’s management refrain from firing the driver over the incident.

The petition noted that the driver was forced to “sharply hit the brakes and rough up customers inside” in direct response to the boy’s actions and claimed that the driver had scolded the boy “like any parent would have done,” only to receive insults in return.

The petition also described the driver as being known for kindness, “Olympic calm” and patience, who’d only reacted to the boy’s insults as he did out of overwhelming emotion after the exceptionally close call of the boy running in front of his bus.

A local authority in the region where the incident occurred, Valérie Pécresse, urged the disciplinary council to “be indulgent towards the Arcueil bus driver who was a victim of provocations and insults.”

“He should not have raised his hand on a schoolchild and regretted it, but he has mitigating circumstances,” said the president of the Ile-de-France region in a post to Twitter.

RELATED: Report: Afghan National Goes on Stabbing Rampage in Paris, Injures 7

This driver probably should have refrained from striking the young boy across the face, particularly in front of other students, and nobody is condoning his actions — for which he has apologized and expressed regret.

However, we can certainly empathize with the driver in that moment fraught with tension, after a boy ran in front of his bus and nearly caused a terrible accident. The boy’s decision to then provocatively insult the driver seems to have prompted a well-deserved scolding for his inconsiderate and dangerous behavior.

We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.

By all accounts, Republican Senator Ted Cruz mopped the floor with democratic challenger Beto O’Rourke in a debate on Friday. The hipster doofus drunk-driving democrat however may have actually done himself in. He had the nerve to state that he fully supports the 2nd Amendment. That was a lie, but when you are a democrat, you never say you support gun rights as it turns off the base. O’Rourke might as well have said that he believes babies have a right to live or people should get to keep most of the money they earn.

Friday’s debate was actually pretty one-sided. Cruz scored point after point while O’Rourke was kind of standing there looking stupid. At one point Cruz accused O’Rourke of wanting to write the 2nd Amendment out of the Bill of Rights, which is 100% accurate. O’Rourke responded like this:

Cruz just forced Beto O’Rourke to say multiple times, “I fully support the Second Amendment.”

This is owning the libs. pic.twitter.com/Wmp20NLQWd

— Benny (@bennyjohnson) September 21, 2018

“Of course I support the 2nd Amendment,” said O’Rourke.

You can actually hear O’Rourke supporters in the crowd booing that their guy said he supports the right to keep and bear arms. Ted Cruz called O’Rourke out on this obvious lie and then the democrat doubled down on it.

“I fully support the 2nd Amendment,” O’Rourke said.

Fully support? The 2nd Amendment says: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. In order for O’Rourke to fully support that, he has to be against any kind of restriction or infringement on private gun ownership.

The thing is, he wants an assault weapons ban:

At SXSW, Beto O’Rourke says there’s no reason an AR-15 should be sold to civilians. “I have no idea how that polls and I should give a shit what the NRA” thinks about it.

— Michael Calderone (@mlcalderone) March 10, 2018

And here’s some more of O’Rourke’s “full” support for gun control from The Houston Chronicle:

During a pair campaign stops in Houston on Thursday, Democrat Beto O’Rourke jumped right into the middle of the gun regulation debate, saying he fully backs a call for universal background checks and a proposal to ban the sale of assault-style weapons.

“There is no reason that weapons of war should be sold to people in this country,” O’Rourke said.

Plus he is very proud of how shitty the NRA rates him on gun ownership rights:

Beto O’Rourke
Last NRA rating: F
Total NRA contributions: $0https://t.co/PGtWuzzZ2t

— Beto O’Rourke (@BetoORourke) February 25, 2018

There actually aren’t degrees of support for the 2nd Amendment. You either support it or you don’t. Beto O’Rourke wants to arbitrarily ban entire classes of weapons and despises the nation’s oldest civil rights organization that fights for gun rights. He doesn’t support the 2nd Amendment at all, let alone “fully.” He is however fully full of shit.

Follow Brian Anderson on Twitter

To say Judge Brett Kavanaugh has been accused, judged, and convicted in the court of public opinion is an understatement.  Rule of law be damned.  In fact, Judge Kavanaugh’s accuser and her enablers have obliterated any fairness or equity as these apply to the foundational legal belief mandating that everyone in society be considered innocent until proven guilty.  Senate Judiciary Committee members Senators Kamala Harris and Amy Klobuchar, both former prosecutors, have decreed that reasonable doubt does not apply in the case of the accuser’s claim of sexual assault.  Incredible as it may sound, her accusation doesn’t need to be proven, either.  In summation, Dr. Christine Blasey Ford simply made the accusation, therefore it must be true.

A Senate Judiciary Committee hearing is not a court of law; however, respect for the rule of law is crucial to democracy, as it mandates that everyone is entitled to due process.  As tasked, the Judiciary Committee is convened to “advise and consent” regarding the president’s nominees to the Supreme Court.  Suffice it to say there are numerous steps in the committee’s process, before the nominee ever appears before the entire body of the judicial committee for questioning.  At the appointed hour, Judge Brett Kavanaugh dutifully appeared, answering numerous questions for several days.  And that’s when the pleasantries ended – cut to the chase!  Shortly after the close of testimony and several days prior to committee vote, Senator Dianne Feinstein entered into the record a letter she had received from California congresswoman Anna Eshoo, supposedly written by Dr. Ford, accusing nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault 36 years ago.

To date, committee chair Chuck Grassley has yet to see the letter.  As parsed by the media, the written accusation is vague and unsubstantiated (no police report was filed at the time of alleged assault), thus raising reasonable doubt as to the accuser’s truthfulness.

According to Senators Kamala Harris and Amy Klobuchar, there is no reason to doubt what Dr. Ford is claiming.  In their collective opinion, Judge Kavanaugh is guilty, and it’s now up to the Senate Judiciary Committee to determine if he is fit to serve on the Supreme Court, based on the accusation.  Senator Kirsten Gillibrand has also determined that it’s a cut and dried case, also based solely on the fact that Dr. Ford made the accusation and therefore must be believed.  Nothing is left to do other than to roll out the guillotine and execute the guilty party.

Thankfully, Chairman Grassley hasn’t lost his mind and will continue to oversee the next phase in this poorly scripted soap opera.  

In every U.S. court of law, the accused is granted the right to face his accuser.  The accused is also presumed innocent until proven guilty – which requires substantiated evidence and the testimony of eyewitnesses.  The burden falls to the accuser to provide evidence in order to prove the accusations, not the other way around.   It’s called due process.

It’s critical to understand that the long respected rule of law is being rewritten in order to validate Dr. Ford’s accusation, in addition to accommodating any future testimony on her part.  In plain speak, she wants her own set of rules in trade for her testimony. 

 Make no mistake: crafting this debacle began months ago and was set into motion just after Judge Kavanaugh’s formal questioning ended.  Senator Feinstein admitted publicly she’s been aware of Dr. Ford’s letter since July.  Not surprisingly, and days after the accuser’s revelation, Senator Feinstein also stated that she can’t attest that the information contained within the letter is truthful.  In other words; Senator Feinstein is attempting to establish plausible deniability.  Sorry, Senator, but it’s a little late for that – it was you who unleashed the maelstrom.

Unbelievably, the accusation itself has eclipsed any facts relevant to the alleged incident.  Judge Kavanaugh has eagerly agreed to another round of questions before the judicial committee.  Understandably, he wants to clear his name and salvage his reputation.  Whether or not Dr. Ford shows up to offer testimony is yet to be determined.

The overriding goal is to ensure that Judge Kavanaugh is not confirmed to the Supreme Court, and by whatever method it takes.  Apparently, all it takes is an unproven accusation to undermine democracy.

To say Judge Brett Kavanaugh has been accused, judged, and convicted in the court of public opinion is an understatement.  Rule of law be damned.  In fact, Judge Kavanaugh’s accuser and her enablers have obliterated any fairness or equity as these apply to the foundational legal belief mandating that everyone in society be considered innocent until proven guilty.  Senate Judiciary Committee members Senators Kamala Harris and Amy Klobuchar, both former prosecutors, have decreed that reasonable doubt does not apply in the case of the accuser’s claim of sexual assault.  Incredible as it may sound, her accusation doesn’t need to be proven, either.  In summation, Dr. Christine Blasey Ford simply made the accusation, therefore it must be true.

A Senate Judiciary Committee hearing is not a court of law; however, respect for the rule of law is crucial to democracy, as it mandates that everyone is entitled to due process.  As tasked, the Judiciary Committee is convened to “advise and consent” regarding the president’s nominees to the Supreme Court.  Suffice it to say there are numerous steps in the committee’s process, before the nominee ever appears before the entire body of the judicial committee for questioning.  At the appointed hour, Judge Brett Kavanaugh dutifully appeared, answering numerous questions for several days.  And that’s when the pleasantries ended – cut to the chase!  Shortly after the close of testimony and several days prior to committee vote, Senator Dianne Feinstein entered into the record a letter she had received from California congresswoman Anna Eshoo, supposedly written by Dr. Ford, accusing nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault 36 years ago.

To date, committee chair Chuck Grassley has yet to see the letter.  As parsed by the media, the written accusation is vague and unsubstantiated (no police report was filed at the time of alleged assault), thus raising reasonable doubt as to the accuser’s truthfulness.

According to Senators Kamala Harris and Amy Klobuchar, there is no reason to doubt what Dr. Ford is claiming.  In their collective opinion, Judge Kavanaugh is guilty, and it’s now up to the Senate Judiciary Committee to determine if he is fit to serve on the Supreme Court, based on the accusation.  Senator Kirsten Gillibrand has also determined that it’s a cut and dried case, also based solely on the fact that Dr. Ford made the accusation and therefore must be believed.  Nothing is left to do other than to roll out the guillotine and execute the guilty party.

Thankfully, Chairman Grassley hasn’t lost his mind and will continue to oversee the next phase in this poorly scripted soap opera.  

In every U.S. court of law, the accused is granted the right to face his accuser.  The accused is also presumed innocent until proven guilty – which requires substantiated evidence and the testimony of eyewitnesses.  The burden falls to the accuser to provide evidence in order to prove the accusations, not the other way around.   It’s called due process.

It’s critical to understand that the long respected rule of law is being rewritten in order to validate Dr. Ford’s accusation, in addition to accommodating any future testimony on her part.  In plain speak, she wants her own set of rules in trade for her testimony. 

 Make no mistake: crafting this debacle began months ago and was set into motion just after Judge Kavanaugh’s formal questioning ended.  Senator Feinstein admitted publicly she’s been aware of Dr. Ford’s letter since July.  Not surprisingly, and days after the accuser’s revelation, Senator Feinstein also stated that she can’t attest that the information contained within the letter is truthful.  In other words; Senator Feinstein is attempting to establish plausible deniability.  Sorry, Senator, but it’s a little late for that – it was you who unleashed the maelstrom.

Unbelievably, the accusation itself has eclipsed any facts relevant to the alleged incident.  Judge Kavanaugh has eagerly agreed to another round of questions before the judicial committee.  Understandably, he wants to clear his name and salvage his reputation.  Whether or not Dr. Ford shows up to offer testimony is yet to be determined.

The overriding goal is to ensure that Judge Kavanaugh is not confirmed to the Supreme Court, and by whatever method it takes.  Apparently, all it takes is an unproven accusation to undermine democracy.