At the center of the operation is Patricia Golder, who, according to the footage, has turned the alleged manipulation of the asylum process into her business. Golder says she takes a portion of the pay given to the Mauritanian migrants in exchange for helping them navigate the system, and she claims she can bribe judges to rule in the migrants’ favor. The footage also suggests that many of the migrants involved neither embrace nor intend to adopt core American values, even as they access public resources designed to protect legitimate asylum seekers. …
“You get the lawyer and you say, ‘Okay, we have this sheet of paper. I need you to ask the judge how much to carry these people two more year in this country? Probably until we get this project done.’ He say, ‘Okay, give me $50,000.'”
That $50,000 will get split up between everybody, Golder says.
I have long assumed this sort of thing goes on, plus lesser forms of deception and gaming the system. I really don’t see how it could be otherwise, and not just in Ohio by any means.
A great many articles discussing this mention that bribery is standard operating procedure in many parts of the world. So of course immigrants from such countries will consider it both necessary and noncontroversial. And that’s where we are.
It’s not as though it’s limited to immigrants, however. When the subject of political bribery comes up, I often think of this song from the long-ago (and not often revived) musical Fiorello!, which I sas as a child. Here’s the musical number; enjoy:
Hordes of leftist activists are roaming Minneapolis and some other areas of Minnesota, attacking anyone suspected of having something to do with ICE, and the police have apparently have been told to stand down. No doubt the hordes believe themselves to be virtuous, so what they’re doing is A-OK.
Minneapolis police appeared to be missing in action as anti-ICE agitators carried out a series of alarming incidents, some violent, throughout the city on Saturday. In some instances, the mere perception that an individual might be pro-ICE was enough to draw the demonstrators’ ire.
One media outlet went so far as to claim that the MPSD had “completely turned over the city to leftists, as they are now forming groups to hunt down anyone who appears to support ICE, with this man [in the clip below] being saved by the feds just moments before being beaten for simply wearing camo.”
Actually, the beating stopped when one of the agitators shouted to his comrades, “He’s one of us.” …
In an extraordinary development on Saturday, anti-ICE agitators mistakenly identified a group of five tech engineers who were having lunch at a Minneapolis deli as undercover ICE agents and accosted them. …
In another case, a man wearing a hoodie emblazoned with the U.S. flag and the word “freedom” was forced to take it off if he didn’t want to get hurt.
More examples can be found at the link.
And then of course there was the church attack, featuring none other than Don Lemon:
Disgraced former CNN host Don Lemon colluded with anti-ICE activists now under investigation for storming a Minnesota church on Sunday—a “clandestine” operation that Lemon helped keep secret ahead of time before publicizing it once it began. …
… [T]he operation targeted Cities Church because an associate pastor is allegedly the acting director of Saint Paul’s ICE office. …
At the church, [the activists, including Lemon] disrupted the service with shouts of “ICE Out!” and other slogans. The pastor targeted in the operation was not present at the church on Sunday. …
Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division Harmeet Dhillon said Sunday that she is investigating the incident for a potential violation of the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act, which makes it illegal to block access to houses of worship. Dhillon also took a swipe at Lemon, writing that his “pseudo journalism” is not protected by the First Amendment.
NOTE: I know you almost certainly know who and what the Brown Shirts were, but a little summary can’t hurt.]
[Today is Martin Luther King Day, and this is a repeat of a previous post. The first link in the speech, to the text of MLK’s 1960 DePauw speech, unfotunately isn’t working anymore.]
From a speech Reverend Martin Luther King delivered at DePauw University in September of 1960:
Black supremacy is as dangerous as white supremacy, and God is not interested merely in the freedom of black men and brown men and yellow men. God is interested in the freedom of the whole human race and the creation of a society where all men will live together as brothers, and all men will respect the dignity and the worth of all human personality.
It’s enough to make you weep, if you think of the fact that such a statement would now be highly controversial and unlikely to find a home on any college campus.
It would probably be problematic on three fronts at least. The first is its use of the phrase “black supremacy” as similar to “white supremacy,” when we all know that according to the Gospel of Marx they are totally different in every way because of the power differentials. The second is the idea that white lives matter too, and that we are one human race who are brothers (actually, come to think of it, MLK’s use of the term “brothers” and “men” to mean “humanity” would probably be a huge no-no as well). The third is his assertion that God is a large part of the reason that all people are one and all need to be respected.
You know what I mean: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
Note, also, that the words say “the pursuit of happiness” – that is, the opportunity to seek it, not the right to have it. All people are not going to be happy, and they are not going to be equal in their life conditions. But they are created equal, and given liberty to, among other things, pursue happiness.
It is no accident that King was a minister. The black community has long been an especially religious one (statistics for 2014 can be found here; I’m not sure what’s been happening in the ensuing years). Also, the underpinnings and strength of the idea of equality has inherent religious dimensions. Without religion, it’s certainly possible to believe the same thing – or at least pay lip service to it. But for many people, leftism has become their religion and leftism says that people must be regarded as different and judged by different standards, according to a hierarchy of victimhood, class, race, and gender that the left sets up.
Also, some religions have been taken over by leftism. One only has to look at Barack Obama’s own church in Chicago, which was headed by another Reverend, Jeremiah Wright, to see what I mean.
Speaking of Obama, remember this sort of thing? It’s a fascinating segment of a speech, because Obama is stating the application of the Declaration to all in the US and quoting the document, but cites the doctrine of equality while leaving out the Creator as the one doing the “endowing.” It’s a significant omission, I believe, and no accident:
Certainly, a person can believe in these truths without believing in God. Also, there are churches and other religious groups that have embraced leftism and its racial blaming and hierarchies. But Martin Luther King’s vision loses much of its potency when its religious underpinnings are weakened. I believe that is at least part of what has happened to it in the last few decades.
Why was King addressing “black supremacy” back in 1960, when there was still not just de facto discrimination in the US but also de jure discrimination? It’s because there has long been a tension and an argument even in the black community and the civil rights community (including white people) between inclusiveness and separatism, love and rage. It’s not new. In the late 60s, not too long after that speech of King’s, it reached a fever pitch. Now the temperature of the fever is even higher.
I very quickly smelled an AI rat. First of all, I don’t think women ever compete on the pommel horse. But secondly, although there are some 75-year-olds who do remarkable things, this “Marha Stillman’s” feats just didn’t seem real.
And they’re not. If you go to the video’s channel it becomes even more clear, because not only is Stillman a whiz at the pommel horse, she can do just about everything – the world’s most versatile athlete.
From the comments, it seems that these videos dupe a lot of people even though the channel site admits to being AI. The following message appears there, although you have to click to see the whole thing:
Official AI-generated sports highlights featuring 75-year-old athlete Marta Stillman — competing at world championships, setting records, and delivering unreal moments with realistic broadcast presentation.
Full TV-style coverage, professional commentary, authentic camera angles, and high-energy action — all created with advanced AI.
The creators even have her physique change somewhat in line with the demands of the different events, as well as her hairdos, outfits, and makeup. For example, she’s slim for most, but here she’s somewhat bulked-up and de-glammed for the shotput:
Rather predictably, Khamenei says it’s all Trump’s fault:
Iranian authorities have repeatedly blamed the US for the mass demonstrations they have called “riots” and “terrorist” operations. Trump had threatened to strike Iran if it did not stop killing protesters, but starting Wednesday sounded a more conciliatory tone, saying he was assured the killings would stop.
In a speech broadcast by state television to mark a religious holiday, Khamenei on Saturday said the protests had left “several thousand” people dead — the first indication from an Iranian leader of the extent of the casualties from the wave of protests that began December 28.
“In this revolt, the US president made remarks in person, encouraged seditious people to go ahead and said: ‘We do support you, we do support you militarily,’” said Khamenei.
“We do consider the US president a criminal, because of casualties and damages, because of accusations against the Iranian nation,” Khamenei said. He described the protesters as “foot soldiers” of the United States and said they had destroyed mosques and educational centers.
We still don’t know whether Trump will be doing more to help the Iranian people; perhaps he will. But if he doesn’t, then this will have been one of his worst moves – to encourage the uprising, promise help, and then fail to give it. Don’t promise if you can’t deliver.
But no, Trump’s not responsible for their deaths. The mullahs are fully and utterly responsible.
What comes to mind immediately are those clichés, “déja vu all over again” and “rinse and repeat.” Negotiating with the mullahs has always been a fool’s game. Whether for reasons of extremist theology or old-fashioned stonewalling or—most likely—because they play the long game, much longer than we could ever do, they can negotiate into oblivion, and nothing ever happens. The Islamic Republic remains the monster that it is.
Meanwhile, we are being inundated with contradictory news about what President Trump is planning. …
What may be at the root of all this presidential indecision, if that’s what this is, is the old saw “When you strike at a king, you must kill him,” popularized by Ralph Waldo Emerson and more recently on cable’s The Wire. Trump knows there is no room for bungling when it comes to finishing off the mullahs. They must be destroyed once and for all, or the mission could well backfire with negative ramifications not only for him, but for what’s left of the Western world.
Somehow, Mamdani got all the coverage, but there’s also a new socialist mayor in Seattle. That Overton Window sure has moved, especially with the younger generation:
Mayor Katie Wilson has been less specific in her proposals than Mamdani, but she also emphasizes that warm collective spirit, and talks about what Democrats see as their best topic: “affordability.”
She wants to tackle homelessness with different tactics:
During her campaign, Wilson criticized the previous administration’s “Unified Care Team,” saying it “chases them around the city at great expense to all of us.” She pointed to the JustCARE partnership, which “resolved” large encampments during the COVID emergency by providing shelter and wraparound services. Wilson pledged to restore and scale up that model.
Good luck with that. In the many years I used to spend a lot of time in Seattle (when Gerard lived there: 2006 to 20014, and then visits every few years after that), I saw the homelessness problem in that city grow enormously. Now I read that there’s been a 26 percent increase in homelessness in Seattle since 2022. And, because Seattle has been run by Democrats for over fifty years (the last Republican mayor left office in 1969), you better believe that the previous “solutions” came from the liberal side.
Now the socialists will get a chance.
NOTE: I don’t know whether you agree with me, but it seems that Seattle’s socialist Katie Wilson and New York’s socialist Cea Weaver somewhat resemble each other. Here’s Wilson and here’s Weaver.
Sometimes Trump is very clear about what he’s doing and why. But sometimes he’s using misdirection to provide cover for some other plan. He can be unpredictable and somewhat unreadable, or he can say what he means and mean what he says.
In the case of the present Iran crisis, it seems to me that not following though on threats would be a bad thing. Trump threatened something big if the mullahs killed a lot of demonstrators. They did, but he doesn’t seem to have done much in response.
However, being flexible and reactive to circumstances is good. What are the circumstances right now? Is something in the works? Does that something involve Israel?:
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu personally asked US President Donald Trump to hold off on a US military attack on Iran, The New York Times reported on Thursday, citing an anonymous senior US official.
The two leaders reportedly held a call on Wednesday. The White House confirmed that a call took place after The Jerusalem Post asked for comment. …
Notably, that same day, Trump claimed that he had received information from “very important sources on the other side,” that Iran had stopped killing dissidents.
Is some action forthcoming from Israel? That country almost certainly has formidable intelligence sources in Iran. Are they using misdirection, or are they saying conditions just aren’t right for intervention at present? We simply don’t know.
“He seems very nice, but I don’t know how he’d play within his own country,” Trump said. “And we really aren’t up to that point yet.
“I don’t know whether or not his country would accept his leadership, and certainly if they would, that would be fine with me.”
Meanwhile, the news from Iran is terrible; please see this. The Times of Israel has a lot of coverage of Iran, all of which I find depressing. For example, there’s this (from someone who admittedly thinks very little of Trump):
The theocratic regime, which has ruled the country since the 1979 revolution, has been shaken to its core, but – like on several occasions in the past 25 years – appears to have survived yet another nationwide wave of protest and dissent from a population that overwhelmingly rejects its oppressive governance. …
While Israel, Saudi Arabia, the UAE and the other Gulf States benefit from a weakened Iranian regime, they do not want one which collapses without an obvious successor.
Paradoxically, they also know that US military intervention could strengthen the Iranian leadership. Since 1999, the regime has relied on the portrayal of its opponents as American and Israeli agents. An American attack strengthens that narrative. …
For all the scale and potential of the protests, the opposition does not have the organization for its political, social and economic ambitions. The regime has seen to that with its decapitation strategy, imprisoning prominent activists from all spheres of Iranian society. How can protesters and the opposition be supported in developing that organization?
But what revolt ever has a certain outcome? If certainty were the requirement, no such movement could ever be supported.
With all the more violent news going on, you may have missed the fact that the administration has unveiled a proposal to replace Obamacare.
Some key elements:
The Great Healthcare Plan calls for codifying the Trump Administration’s Most-Favored-Nation deals to get Americans the same low prices for prescription drugs that people in other countries pay. …
The Great Healthcare Plan makes more verified safe pharmaceutical drugs available for over-the-counter purchase. …
The Great Healthcare Plan stops sending big insurance companies billions in extra taxpayer-funded subsidy payments and instead send that money directly to eligible Americans to allow them to buy the health insurance of their choice.
The Great Healthcare Plan funds a cost-sharing reduction program for healthcare plans which would save taxpayers at least $36 billion and reduce the most common Obamacare plan premiums by over 10% according to the Congressional Budget Office.
The Great Healthcare Plan will end the kickbacks paid by pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) to the large brokerage middlemen that deceptively raise the cost of health insurance.
Would Congress pass this? And would it actually help the situation? I’ve long been pessimistic about solutions to the problem of high health care costs (plus rampant fraud, apparently). But that doesn’t mean a switch from Obamacare couldn’t make things at least somewhat better. I don’t have the economics chops to figure out whether this would help, and at the moment I can’t find an analysis I trust. If you have one, please put a link in the comments.
This Reuters article (a news outlet hardly sympatico with Trump) mentions the following criticism:
Critics say replacing subsidies with direct payments could force lower-income Americans to shift toward less comprehensive plans sold outside of former President Barack Obama’s signature Affordable Care Act. That law sought to put all Americans – both healthy and sick – in one marketplace to keep premiums down.
Yes, that was the stated idea. But premiums haven’t been kept down.
