53percenter's Blog

Police are investigating a complaint of an alleged ‘hate incident’ in which a transgender model was denied a job as a female porn star after the photographer discovered the model still had a penis.

Ria Cooper, who became the UK’s youngest transgender person aged 15 before later transitioning back to male age 18, and then to female again later, has accused the photographer of ‘transphobic behaviour’. Cooper said the incident could prevent a future career in the modelling industry.

According to claims reported by the Hull Daily Mail, after posting pictures on social media of a new glamour portfolio, a man reached out to Cooper. He claimed that he could advance her modelling career, and offered her money to have sex with him on camera.

When the man discovered that Ria had male sexual organs, he broke off contact, saying he would not work with her because she still had “a c**k”.

In a private message, the man reportedly said: “Why don’t you send one of yours, my friend just told me — sorry Playboy won’t accept that.”

Sweden: Gender Surgery on Young People Lacks Evidence of Preventing Suicide https://t.co/EnX8RxvWAn

— Breitbart London (@BreitbartLondon) October 11, 2019

Speaking to the local newspaper, Ria said: “I am reporting this as a hate crime. It’s like calling someone who is black the ‘N’ word. It doesn’t matter if I have c*** or not. The pictures should be judged as they are. It says on my social media profile that I am a ladyboy, I didn’t ever say that I wasn’t and I thought he knew.”

The aspiring model went on to say: “I want to be a glamour model and a porn star — that’s what I want to do. I don’t think I should be treated like this. I just think those comments could easily make someone commit suicide. It is so bad that I have gone to the police.”

A spokeswoman for the Humberside Police told the paper: “We received a report of a hate incident… The report has been logged and will be investigated.”

BBC Biased in Transgender, Immigration Debates, Says Former Host https://t.co/Sv8PUze54F

— Breitbart London (@BreitbartLondon) October 8, 2019

There’s not really any good defense for President Trump’s “lynching” tweet.

It articulated a common frustration many Republicans have with the president: At a time when different language might have served to buttress his case that the Democrats’ impeachment inquiry was making a mockery of historical precedent in favor of a railroading, the focus was instead on the president’s phraseology.

Just in case you missed it, on Tuesday, the president caused no small amount of controversy by using the metaphor in a Twitter post admonishing the Democrats for the zeal with which they’re pursuing their impeachment inquiry.

“So some day, if a Democrat becomes President and the Republicans win the House, even by a tiny margin, they can impeach the President, without due process or fairness or any legal rights,” he wrote.

“All Republicans must remember what they are witnessing here – a lynching. But we will WIN!”

TRENDING: Tucker Carlson Hints Real Reason Behind NBC Firing Megyn Kelly: Matt Lauer Scandal

So some day, if a Democrat becomes President and the Republicans win the House, even by a tiny margin, they can impeach the President, without due process or fairness or any legal rights. All Republicans must remember what they are witnessing here – a lynching. But we will WIN!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) October 22, 2019

Biden got in on the condemnation with a decided swiftness, calling Trump’s remarks “abhorrent.”

Impeachment is not “lynching,” it is part of our Constitution. Our country has a dark, shameful history with lynching, and to even think about making this comparison is abhorrent. It’s despicable. https://t.co/QcC25vhNeb

— Joe Biden (@JoeBiden) October 22, 2019

“Impeachment is not ‘lynching,’ it is part of our Constitution,” he tweeted.

“Our country has a dark, shameful history with lynching, and to even think about making this comparison is abhorrent. It’s despicable.”

So it’s “abhorrent.” It’s “despicable.” It’s also a metaphor Biden himself employed during the 1998 impeachment of Bill Clinton.

Biden was, at the time, a senator from Delaware and had previously been both chairman and ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

He was a vociferous opponent of the Clinton impeachment, which isn’t any surprise; almost all Democrats were.

RELATED: Zogby Poll Shows Trump Taking Down 2020 Democrats Repeatedly – Best They Can Manage Is Warren Tying Him

What might have been surprising, given Biden’s contribution to the sturm und drang created by Trump’s tweet on Tuesday, was the language that he used in an appearance on CNN during the Clinton era.

“Even if the president should be impeached, history will question whether or not this was a partisan lynching or whether or not it was something that, in fact, met the standard,” Biden told Wolf Blitzer, arguing Clinton’s behavior in the White House didn’t meet “the very high bar that was set by the founders as to what constituted an impeachable offense.”

While Biden has called Trump’s lynching comments “abhorrent” and “despicable,” in 1998 appearance on CNN, Biden said impeachment could end up being viewed as a “partisan lynching.” https://t.co/4jGo8hSQSZhttps://t.co/6p210g7M6l pic.twitter.com/UkJiXLsHOG

— andrew kaczynski🤔 (@KFILE) October 22, 2019

Biden, of course, was very apologetic about using this language once the video went viral.

“This wasn’t the right word to use and I’m sorry about that,” Biden said.

“Trump on the other hand chose his words deliberately today in his use of the word lynching and continues to stoke racial divides in this country daily.”

This wasn’t the right word to use and I’m sorry about that. Trump on the other hand chose his words deliberately today in his use of the word lynching and continues to stoke racial divides in this country daily. https://t.co/mHfFC8HluZ

— Joe Biden (@JoeBiden) October 23, 2019

This doesn’t wash, for several reasons.

It’s worth noting that with many of Biden’s racial controversies, mores do shift. His comments on busing back in the 1970s and his support for tough crime bills in the 1990s were very much in line with the spirit of the times, even if they don’t sound good to Democratic audiences in 2019.

His comments regarding lynching are different.

We knew the evils of lynching and the tacitly sanctioned murder of blacks in the American South just as manifestly in 1998 as we do in 2019. We knew how inapt the act of lynching was as a metaphor for a political process. All of this was known — and all of it was ignored by the media in the aftermath of Biden’s CNN appearance.

Furthermore, Biden’s claim that Trump “chose his words deliberately” also doesn’t hold water, at least as a defense. Take a look at the Biden-Blitzer interview. It doesn’t seem like someone shooting from the hip. Biden instead looks like a man choosing his words with the same amount of deliberation that President Trump did. Yet we’re supposed to believe this was just some slip of the tongue.

If Biden is saying he didn’t choose his words deliberately, the same could be said for Donald Trump. If he’s saying Trump meant his words deliberately, we can safely assume Biden did, too. An apology 21 years after the remarks were made isn’t worth the keystrokes Biden expended typing it out.

Nobody ought to pretend that Donald Trump’s tweet was proper. But then, neither were Biden’s remarks.

This isn’t bothsidesism or equivocation. Instead, it’s pointing out the fact that nobody in the media seems to want to hold Democrats to the same standards they’re holding the president.

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

Monday on “Fox & Friends,” former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee (R) reacted to the revelation Sen. Mitt Romney (R-UT) has been using a fake Twitter account to defend himself.

Huckabee said the fact that Romney is a 72-year-old U.S. senator running a fake Twitter account is “stunning,” adding it is “the work of kids, cowards, couch potatoes and perverts.”

“The man’s 72 years old,” Huckabee emphasized. “Having fake Twitter accounts on social media, that’s the work of kids, cowards, couch potatoes and perverts like Carlos Danger. What on Earth does a United States senator do calling himself Pierre Dilecto? If he’s got something to say, man up and say it.”

“Let us all realize that this guy is not a team player,” he continued. “He’s still bitter because Donald Trump got elected and he didn’t. He needs to get over it.”

Follow Trent Baker on Twitter @MagnifiTrent

Border agencies can use DNA testing to help identify and track migrants when they enter the United States, according to a rule issued Monday by the Department of Justice.

The technology is being adopted because migrants can change their claimed names and documents once they get into the United States, so making it difficult for officials to find migrants who hide once they lose their claims for asylum. The decision covers illegal migrants as well as migrants who legally ask for asylum so they can enter to get jobs.

The move is controversial because Americans do not like the use of DNA testing to mark each person’s identity. But the policy is being adopted because Republicans and Democrats in Congress tolerate large volumes of illegal migration. For example, more than 3 million Central Americans have moved though border loopholes into the United States since 2011, aided by anti-border progressive and cheap-labor businesses.

So far, there is no move to use the same DNA technology on Americans, partly because Americans’ identity is recorded at birth and is tracked by the use of legal documents, such as drivers’ licenses, credit cards, and tax forms.

Pro-migration groups are criticizing the DNA policy they helped to create. For example, the policy is opposed by Vera Eidelmen, a lawyer with the American Civil Liberties Union which has opened up loopholes and border law and is now fighting the administrations’ many efforts to curb illegal migration:

Forced DNA collection raises serious privacy and civil liberties concerns and lacks justification, especially when DHS is already using less intrusive identification methods like fingerprinting. Our DNA not only reveals deeply personal information about us, but also information about our relatives. This means the administration’s racist immigration policies will also implicate the rights of family members in other countries and family members here, including American citizens. This kind of mass collection alters the purpose of DNA collection from one of criminal investigation to population surveillance, which is contrary to our basic notions of freedom and autonomy.

Breitbart News has reported on the many murders committed by migrants, many of whom have been aided by the ACLU’s pro-migration policies.

The technology is already being used to verify claims by groups of migrants that they are eligible for the Flores loophole, which was created by an ACLU lawsuit.

The Department of Justice posted the news Monday morning, saying:

The proposed rule change would help to save lives and bring criminals to justice by restoring the authority of the Attorney General to authorize and direct the collection of DNA from non-United States persons detained at the border and the interior by DHS, with the ultimate goal of reducing victimization of innocent citizens,” said Deputy Attorney General Jeffrey A. Rosen.

Today’s proposed rule change is a lawful exercise of the Attorney General’s authority, provided by Congress, to collect DNA samples from non-United States persons who are properly detained under the authority of the United States.”

As a result of this rule change, the Department of Justice will ensure that all federal agencies—including DHS—are in full compliance with the bipartisan DNA Fingerprint Act, which was a component of a larger legislative package that passed the House of Representatives by an overwhelming vote of 415 to four and the Senate by Unanimous Consent.  The DNA Fingerprint Act provided the Attorney General with the exclusive authority to draft regulations to authorize and direct any federal agency to “collect DNA samples from individuals who are arrested, facing charges, or convicted or from non-United States persons who are detained under the authority of the United States.” 24 U.S.C. § 40702(a)(1)(A).

300K+ child & youth migrants have been split from their families by Congress’ unanimously clueless 2008 vote to create the ‘UAC’ pipeline into the US. Trump’s DoJ has a draft fix, but Dems, biz & media are fighting to continue the family-splitting pipeline https://t.co/mv8YyVxjzq

— Neil Munro (@NeilMunroDC) October 4, 2019

 

 

A Dallas federal court sentenced a five-time deported criminal alien to a 10-year prison term for illegally re-entering the United States after removal. The sentence is the maximum allowed under the federal sentencing guidelines.

Senior U.S. District Court Judge John H. McBryde handed down a prison sentence of ten years to Antonio Serrano-Perez, a 39-year-old Mexican national from Tamaulipas, on October 18. The sentence is the statutory maximum based upon the criminal alien’s immigration and criminal history, according to information obtained from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials (ICE).

Serrano-Perez’s record includes five deportations from the United States over a 20-year period, officials stated. Immigration officers removed him for the first time in October 1998. He illegally re-entered the U.S. in 2005 at the age of 25. After being arrested for an immigration violation, a federal judge in the Southern District of Texas sentenced him t a 27-month prison sentence. Immigration officers removed him most recently in 2014, officials stated.

Prosecutors testified that Serrano-Perez illegally re-entered the U.S sometime after the 2014 removal and moved to Fort Worth. Immigration officers tracked him down and arrested him outside his residence on March 11, 2019.

The judge noted that during Serrano-Perez’s time in the U.S., he racked up a series of state drug and violent crime convictions. He also received three federal immigration convictions. Some of his crimes include cocaine trafficking and family violence, the judge noted during the sentencing phase.

“This felon and narcotics trafficker has been deported to Mexico five times and has repeatedly demonstrated that he has no respect for U.S. laws,” ICE Dallas Field Office Director Marc J. Moore said in a written statement. “Throughout his extensive criminal career, he has operated as though the United States is simply a profitable location for him to traffic in illegal drugs. After he fully completes his latest federal prison sentence for illegally re-entering the United States, our ICE officers will deport him a sixth time.”
Assistant U.S. Attorney Levi Thomas led the prosecution for the Northern District of Texas following ann investigation and arrest by officers and agents assigned to ICE Enforcement and Removal Operations and Homeland Security Investigations.

Bob Price serves as associate editor and senior political news contributor for the Breitbart Texas-Border team. He is an original member of the Breitbart Texas team. Follow him on Twitter @BobPriceBBTX and Facebook.

Houlton Sector Border Patrol agents apprehended three migrants from three countries after stopping to assist a stranded motorist. Two of the migrants entered the U.S. illegally along the southern border while the third overstayed a visa.

Agents assigned to the Rangeley Border Patrol station in Maine stopped to assist a motorist in a broken down vehicle on October 10. The agents determined that three men in the vehicle were illegally present in the United States, according to information obtained from Border Patrol officials.

During an immigration interview, the agents learned that one of the men, a 42-year-old Chinese national entered the U.S. in 2001 on a fiancée visa, officials reported. The man did not marry as required as a condition of the visa and subsequently failed to depart from the country. A records check revealed a criminal record for domestic violence. Agents determined the migrant violated the terms of his visa and arrested him on immigration violations.

A second migrant, a 22-year-old man from Guatemala, admitted to Border Patrol agents that he illegally entered the U.S. by crossing the Rio Grande into Laredo in 2013. An immigration court ordered his removal after he failed to appear before the court in 2013. He has previous arrests for public intoxication and trespassing.

The third migrant, a 25-year-old man from Mexico admitted to the Border Patrol agents that he illegally crossed the border into Arizona. He said he lived in the U.S. for several years and had been recruited to work in the foodservice industry in Maine.

Agents turned all three illegal aliens over to immigration officers for processing into removal proceedings, officials stated.

“The roads and highways of Maine are being used to facilitate illicit trade and travel. Securing the border requires us to not only give attention to the immediate border areas but also the routes and means of egress to the interior of the United States,” Houlton Sector Chief Patrol Agent Jason Owens said in a written statement.

“Under Title 8 of the U.S. Code, it is a federal crime to enter the United States illegally and to misrepresent a material fact while seeking admission to the United States,” Houlton Sector officials stated.

Bob Price serves as associate editor and senior political news contributor for the Breitbart Texas-Border team. He is an original member of the Breitbart Texas team. Follow him on Twitter @BobPriceBBTX and Facebook.