WATCH: Ami Horowitz Explains American Business-Crushing Shipping Law Trump Just Took Action To Stop

H/T Right Wing Folks.

President Trump is making  America competitive again.

On Thursday, President Trump issued a presidential memorandum that takes aim at a decades-old shipping agreement with a United Nations agency that gives some foreign countries, including China, a dramatically unfair advantage over American-based companies when it comes to shipping costs. The policy is costing American taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars annually and has made it extremely difficult for American companies to compete in the online marketplace.

In a newly-released video, filmmaker Ami Horowitz explains why the administration’s actions are crucial in giving American companies a fighting chance in the e-commerce world. E-commerce, Horowitz explains, is “the fastest growing segment of consumer sales, and is becoming a more important part of our economy every day.” But the marketplace “is quickly becoming the domain of the Chinese, in large part because the ecommerce playing field is tilted sharply in favor of Chinese merchants at the expense of their U.S. competitors.

The slanted playing field is the result of an international treaty with the U.N.’s Universal Postal Union that gives preference to less wealthy, “transitional” countries, of which China is included, by forcing federal postal services of wealthier countries to subsidize freight rates for packages coming from the poorer companies.

“Shipping costs have become a big part of the decision-making process when buying something online,” Horowitz says. “The primary reason for this imbalance is a decades-old arrangement for incoming packages set by a U.N. agency called the Universal Postal Union. A deal was made to ship other packages, including China, anywhere in the U.S. for about $1.50, without regard to the real costs borne by the U.S. Postal Service.”

In other words, American customers ordering online often find it is cheaper to have a product shipped from a foreign country than one in the U.S. The result has been China’s growing dominance in e-commerce at the expense of American businesses.

WATCH:

On Thursday, Trump made clear that the U.S. will no longer allow this unfair policy to continue. Here is an excerpt of the memorandum:

(i) UPU terminal dues, in many cases, are less than comparable domestic postage rates. As a result:

(A) the United States, along with other member countries of the UPU, is in many cases not fully reimbursed by the foreign postal operator for the cost of delivering foreign-origin letter post items, which can result in substantial preferences for foreign mailers relative to domestic mailers;

(B) the current terminal dues rates undermine the goal of unrestricted and undistorted competition in cross-border delivery services because they disadvantage non-postal operators seeking to offer competing collection and outward transportation services for goods covered by terminal dues in foreign markets; and

(C) the current system of terminal dues distorts the flow of small packages around the world by incentivizing the shipping of goods from foreign countries that benefit from artificially low reimbursement rates.

Advertisements

NPR: Department of Education Wildly Overstates Number of School-Related Shootings in New Survey

H/T The Washington Free Beacon.

Wow NPR has actually performed a random act of journalism.

he Department of Education reported there were 235 school-related shootings in the United States during the 2015-16 school year, but NPR could confirm less than 5 percent of the incidents occurred in a new report.

Of the 235 school-related shooting incidents, NPR only confirmed 11 of them. It reported 161 schools or school districts told NPR no shootings had occurred, four were miscategorized, and 59 could not be either confirmed or unconfirmed by NPR.

The huge discrepancy calls into question the reliability of data disseminated by the government on the pressing issue of school safety.

The Department of Education told NPR it relied on school districts to give accurate information in its annual Civil Rights Data Collection. It asked for the 2015-16 school year, “Has there been at least one incident at your school that involved a shooting (regardless of whether anyone was hurt)?” It published the eye-popping number—”nearly 240 schools (0.2 percent of all schools)”—this spring.

It was nowhere close to the left-wing advocacy group Everytown for Gun Safety’s data on the question, which listed 29 shootings at K-12 schools during the same period. Only seven schools appeared on both the government’s and Everytown’s lists:

separate investigation by the ACLU of Southern California also was able to confirm fewer than a dozen of the incidents in the government’s report, while 59 percent were confirmed errors.

One of the biggest reasons for the discrepancy in the Civil Rights Data Collection number was the Cleveland Metropolitan School District listing 37 incidents in its district alone for that year. Roseann Canfora, the district’s chief communications officer, told NPR that 37 schools had in fact reported incidents involving “possession of a knife or a firearm,” the previous question on the form. The district slotted the number in the wrong line in the survey.

There are multiple other examples of situations that didn’t involve the discharging of a firearm but were listed as shootings:

Ray Poole, the chief of legal services for the Nassau County School District in Florida, told us that at one school where a shooting was reported, Callahan Middle School, on Nov. 21, 2015, a Saturday, a student took a picture of himself at home holding a gun and posted it to social media. “We got wind of it and nipped it in the bud.” No shooting.

The CRDC shows seven shootings in DeKalb County, Ga. Police reports provided to us by that district give a sense of more of the many, many ways the data collection may have gone wrong.

At Redan Middle School, there is a report of a toy cap gun fired on a school bus — not a shooting.

The CRDC shows a shooting at Stone Mountain Middle School, but a police report shows an incident at Stone Mountain High School instead.

And district officials provided a police report showing that there was a shooting after a McNair High School football game — in August 2016, after the time period covered in the survey.

Liberal California Passes Law to HELP Criminals Get Out of Jail

 

 

H/T Right Wing Folks.

We need to extend the wall President Trump wants on the border to included blocking Commifornia from the rest of America.

With the stroke of California Gov. Jerry Brown’s pen on Tuesday, California became the first state ever to eliminate cash bail for criminal suspects awaiting trial.

You read that right.

Gov. Brown Press Office

@GovPressOffice

➡️@JerryBrownGov Signs Legislation to Revamp California’s Bail System, Protect Public Safety: https://bit.ly/2N2YWvI 

California is now going out of its way to help criminals stay out of jail. The state is also a “sanctuary state,” which shields criminal illegal immigrants from federal immigration authorities.

The controversial bill will replace the bail system with a “risk-assessment” system, leaving much of the decision-making up to the judge.

“The legislation gives officials 24 hours to determine whether other suspects should be released before trial. That time can be extended by 12 hours if necessary,” the Associated Press reported. “Opponents of the legislation say it gives judges too much power. Some worry dangerous people will go free and won’t return for trial.”

“Most” suspects arrested for nonviolent misdemeanors will likely be released with no questions asked within 12 hours, according to the AP.

Los Angeles Times

@latimes

Breaking: California Gov. Jerry Brown signs a landmark bill to overhaul the state’s money-bail system, replacing it with one that grants judges greater power to decide who should remain incarcerated ahead of trial http://lat.ms/2NspPpZ 

Gov. Jerry Brown signs overhaul of bail system, saying now ‘rich and poor alike are treated fairly’

Gov. Jerry Brown signed a sweeping change on Tuesday to the system of bail for criminal defendants in California “so that rich and poor alike are treated fairly,” he said.

latimes.com

Fortunately, suspected criminals charged with violent felonies, however, won’t be eligible for pre-trial release.

“Brown’s signature gives the state’s Judicial Council broad authority to reshape pretrial detention policies,” the report added. “Each county will use the council’s framework as a basis to set its own procedures for deciding whom to release before trial, potentially creating a patchwork system based on where a suspect lives.”

The Wall Street Journal

@WSJ

Gov. Brown of California eliminated cash bail “so that rich and poor alike are treated fairly.” The ACLU isn’t so sure. https://on.wsj.com/2wsV2C9 

California eliminates cash bail, accelerating a national trend

California Eliminates Cash Bail, Accelerating a National Trend

California Governor Jerry Brown on Tuesday signed legislation eliminating cash bail for people accused of crimes, in a major step forward for a growing national movement

wsj.com

Maybe one day California can focus on passing laws that benefit law-abiding American citizens.

 

3 ‘extremist Muslim’ New Mexico compound suspects released after judge drops all charges

H/T Fox News.

While the move sucks, unfortunately, the judge was correct according to the law.

The prosecutor dropped the ball and needs his or her ass kicked.

Three suspects tied to a New Mexico compound where alleged Muslim extremists reportedly trained children to be school shooters were released from custody on Wednesday, hours after a judge dismissed all of the charges against them, Fox News confirmed.

District Judge Emilio Chavez on Wednesday dismissed charges against three of the five defendants — Lucas Morton, Subhannah Wahhaj and Hujrah Wahhaj — ruling that authorities violated the state’s “10-day rule.

Child abuse charges against them were dropped because prosecutors missed the 10-day limit for an evidentiary hearing to establish probable cause.

During a separate hearing Wednesday, Judge Jeff McElroy dismissed the same charges against fellow defendants, Siraj Ibn Wahhaj and Jany Leveille. However, charges leveled against them on Friday, in connection to the death of a missing 3-year-old boy, remained.

Siraj Ibn Wahhaj, the boy’s father, and Leveille were charged with abuse of a child resulting in the death of a child and conspiracy to commit abuse of a child, Taos County Sheriff Jerry Hogrefe announced.

The five suspects were arrested by authorities after an Aug. 3 raid following a monthslong search investigating the disappearance of Abdul-ghani Wahhaj, a 3-year-boy with severe medical issues who went missing from Georgia in December. The occupants of the compound were “most likely heavily armed and considered extremist of the Muslim belief,” an official said at the time.

Taos County Sheriff’s deputies discovered 11 children at the compound, who were taken into the custody of state child-welfare workers. On Aug. 6, a child’s remains were found on the property.

Siraj Ibn Wahhaj was allegedly training children to commit school shootings, according to prosecutors, who later alleged that the juveniles were taught how to use firearms, as well as tactical techniques, in order to kill teachers, law enforcement and other institutions they found corrupt.

Health officials confirmed earlier this month that the discovered remains were positively identified as the 3-year-old’s.

Chavez said Wednesday that it was a very difficult decision to drop the charges but the rule left him with no option. Prosecutors could still seek charges for the three by asking a grand jury to indict them but offered no immediate indication on how they would proceed

Renaming Senate office building after McCain sparks GOP backlash

H/T The Hill.

Is the building named for Sen. Richard Brevard Russell (D-Ga.) destined to be renamed because he opposed civil rights and could be a racist?

A push to rename a Senate office building after the late Sen. John McCain(R-Ariz.) is facing political headwinds on Capitol Hill from Republican lawmakers.

Sens. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) are working on a resolution that would rename the Russell Senate Office Building, named in honor of former Democratic Sen. Richard Brevard Russell (Ga.), after McCain.

But the proposal is facing skepticism, and in some cases outright opposition, threatening to inject partisan fighting into the chamber’s bipartisan mourning.

“Senator Russell was a well respected man from the South and up here too,” said Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.), adding that he was “a man of his time.”

“He was a well-respected senator,” Shelby said.

Russell is considered controversial because of his opposition to civil rights legislation.

Shelby noted that if reporters were going to judge Russell on his civil rights stance then they would also need to reevaluate the Founding Fathers.

“If you want to get into that you have to get into George Washington and Thomas Jefferson and all of our — most of our Founding Fathers, maybe with the exception of Hamilton,” he said. “It’s easy to prejudge what they should have done.”

Shelby was one of several Southern GOP senators who pushed back on the idea of taking Russell’s name off the Senate office building.

Georgia Sen. David Perdue — a Republican and close ally of Trump — touted Russell’s Senate work, saying on Tuesday that he was a “stalwart” of the military and involved in the Great Society, referring to the domestic program of former President Lyndon B. Johnson.

“This is a guy who was a giant of the Senate,” Perdue said. “So this renaming thing because of one issue, you know, is somewhat troubling. The fact that it’s been brought into this John McCain thing I think is inappropriate.”

Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) told reporters that he would prefer to “find another way” to honor McCain.

“What I don’t want is to establish a precedent so that something named after John McCain is named after somebody else in the future,” Cassidy said.

The GOP pushback is the latest sign that what had emerged as a bipartisan idea in the immediate wake of McCain’s death is already losing momentum in the Senate, where McCain served for more than three decades.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) demurred on Monday when asked if he supports renaming the building after McCain.

He announced on Tuesday that he would create a bipartisan “gang” to make a decision on how the Senate honors McCain.

“The Senate is eager to work on concrete ways to … provide a lasting tribute to this American hero long after this week’s observances are complete,” McConnell said.

But he did not include renaming Russell among the possible options, instead using his Senate floor speech to highlight possibly renaming the Armed Services Committee room or hanging a McCain portrait in a room off the Senate floor.

Spokespeople for McConnell didn’t respond to a request for comment about whether they were given a heads-up before Schumer said on Saturday, shortly after McCain’s death was announced, that he would try to rename the Senate office building.

Flake said he and McConnell were discussing the issue. Schumer directed questions to the Senate GOP leader when he was asked about McConnell’s support on Monday.

Schumer told reporters on Tuesday that he didn’t know why some Republicans were reluctant to endorse his idea.

“I think it’s the most appropriate way to honor Senator McCain,” he said. “And we’re going to work to try and see that that can get done in a bipartisan way.”

Flake and Schumer are circulating a “dear colleague” letter asking senators to support the resolution. They have not publicly specified when they would introduce the proposal.

“Renaming the Russell building in his honor ensures that his story will be told with the hope that inspiration becomes motivation and future leaders emerge with his brand of courage and commitment,” Flake and Schumer wrote in the letter to their Senate colleagues.

The idea has bipartisan support from Democrats, as well as some Republicans.

Independent Sen. Angus King (Maine), who caucuses with Democrats, joked on CNN that when he was a Senate staffer people affectionately referred to Russell “as the old SOB.”

“And I can’t imagine a more appropriate place to put John McCain’s name,” he said on Tuesday.

GOP Sen. Bob Corker (Tenn.) — who, like McCain, was critical of Trump on foreign policy — told reporters that he was open to “whatever” to honor McCain.

“Whatever it is appropriate,” Corker told reporters, throwing up his arms when asked specifically about renaming Russell. “I’m up for whatever.”

GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham (S.C.), a close friend of McCain’s, joked with reporters that he would rename the Capitol, the Capitol Visitors Center and the Pentagon after McCain if he could, before acknowledging he wanted to get feedback from McCain’s family.

“I’d name the Capitol after him, if I could,” he told reporters. “But I don’t know, I want to talk to Cindy and see what they think.”

Several GOP senators pointed on Tuesday to McConnell’s decision to form a committee as the best path forward.

Perdue said he supported McConnell’s decision to form a committee and that it was “premature” to discuss renaming Russell, one of three Senate office buildings on Capitol Hill.

“I’m predisposed to say that renaming that building is a serious issue, but I believe right now it is even premature to talk about that,” he said when asked if he would support renaming the building if that is what the panel recommends.

Sen. Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.) said McConnell’s panel was a “great idea” but declined to comment on Schumer’s resolution. Sen. John Thune (R-S.D), asked if he would support renaming the building, pointed to the process set up by McConnell.

“Well, I’m very much in favor of honoring Senator McCain,” Thune said. “How we do that exactly is something I think is something that we’re going to have a conversation about.”

Police Officers Are Not Disproportionately Killing Black Men—Here Are the Facts

H/T Town Hall.

The race-baiting black misleaders and the drive-by media will choose to ignore these facts as they do not fit their narrative the police are racist murderers.

Democrats have a new hero in Beto O’Rourke, who is campaigning against Texas Sen. Ted Cruz. Hatred for Cruz is enough to get Democrats excited by the prospect of unseating him, but O’Rourke has also won them over on Wednesday by campaigning against police brutality toward blacks.

O’Rourke asserts that law enforcement members are killing unarmed, black children at a “frightening level” and aren’t being held accountable. He expresses approval for “peaceful, non-violent protests, including taking a knee at a football game.”

When Colin Kaepernick started kneeling during the National Anthem a couple of years ago, he wanted to protest police “getting away with murder” of black people.   Over the weekend, whole NFL football teams protested police racism against blacks. Protests during the National Anthem have spread to the NBA and major league baseball. In St. Louis last week, after a white officer was acquitted for shooting a black man, protestors chanted “hey ho, hey ho, these racist cops have got to go.” President Trump has called out these protestors, but the perception of many is that racism explains why white officers shoot blacks.

The media has helped create a biased perception. In a recent study, the Crime Prevention Research Center finds that when a white officer kills a suspect, the media usually mentions the race of the officer. This is rarely true when the officer is black.

Polls of blacks paint a bleak picture of relations between blacks and the police, but there is other evidence based on behavior that, overall, blacks trust police at least as much as whites do.

A recent Quinnipiac survey of New York City found that blacks were 11 percentage points more likely to approve of the police in their neighborhood than of the NYPD as a whole.  The police that blacks know best, they like.

If blacks really believe that police are racist, one may think that black victims would be less likely to report crimes committed against them. After all, they may doubt the commitment of the officers to solving the crimes. They may think that officers will engage in profiling and arrest an innocent black suspect.

In fact, blacks don’t shy away from reporting crimes to the police. Our report, comparing Department of Justice survey data to crimes reported to the police, shows that from 2008 to 2012 blacks were actually more likely than whites to report violent crimes committed against them to the police — 9 percentage points more likely than whites (54 percent to 45 percent).

That higher rate of reporting applies to all income groups and to both urban and suburban areas. And it’s not just that blacks report more crime because they experience more of it. This higher rate of reporting even holds true in areas where whites face higher violent crime rates than blacks do.

This trust appears to be well-placed. White police officers aren’t killing defenseless blacks just because they can.

We found 2,699 police shootings from 2013-2015. We couldn’t rely on FBI data, which consists of cases voluntarily provided by police departments. The FBI lists only 1,366 suspect deaths over the same 3-year period. Our more comprehensive list comes from use of Lexis/Nexis, Freedom of Information Act requests, internet news searches, and several online databases.

The FBI database not only misses half of these cases, it also misses important information that is necessary to understanding why the officers resorted to deadly force, such as whether the suspect was armed or killed while in the act of committing a crime. The FBI disproportionately includes cases from heavily minority areas, giving a misleading picture of the frequency at which blacks are shot.

Our estimates also account for violent crime rates, demographics of the city and police department, characteristics of the suspect and officer, the rate at which police in the state are killed, the educational requirements of the department, and many other factors.

The black officers that we identified were more likely to kill black suspects than were their white colleagues, but the differences were not always statistically significant, meaning that we can’t be sure they were real. At the very least, there’s no evidence of white officers disproportionately shooting blacks.

Fortunately, there are steps that we can take to try to reduce the killings. When more police are present at the scene, suspects face reduced odds of being killed. The difference is about 14 to 18 percent for each additional officer. Officers may feel more vulnerable if they are alone at the scene, making them more likely to resort to deadly force. By the same token, suspects are more likely to be emboldened and resist arrest when fewer officers are present.

Police unionization may have had the largest effect, apparently making suspects at least 65% more likely to be killed. This needs more studying, but it could be due to the fact that unions shield their officers from scrutiny or other factors such as laws that delay prosecutors questioning officers. This may make officers more willing to shoot when their own safety feels at all jeopardized.

Many support requiring that officers wear body cameras.   We surveyed 900 police departments, 162 of which reported their officers used body cameras.  But police acted the same regardless of whether they are wearing the cameras. The Obama administration argued that fear of being recorded would give many officers pause before misbehaving, but that only matters if the officers are misbehaving.

O’Rourke is contributing to a dangerous fiction that prejudiced white officers are going out and disproportionately killing black men. But that doesn’t mean that measures can’t be taken to reduce police shootings. The most obvious step would be to increase the number of officers, in the hopes that more will be present at the scenes of these incidents.

* Lott is the president of the Crime Prevention Research Center, and he co-authored the research discussed here with Professor Carlisle Moody from the College of William & Mary. The research is available here (https://ssrn.com/abstract=2870189).

Google Rigging Search Results is a Fact

Jim Campbell's

Comment by Jim Campbell

August 29th, 2018

We have heard about this in the past.

When Daniel Greenfield says it’s factual, bet the house on it.

Front Page Magazine

Daniel Greenfield

August 28, 2018

There is no question about it, Google’s intentions are evil.

 

If President Trump were to tweet that the sky is a blue, a thousand fact checks would claim that it’s really mauve. 

That’s about the level that the media explainers and fact checkers are descending when they attack President Trump’s assertion that Google rigs its search results.

While the question of whether (or to what extent) Google rigs results for political reasons can be debated, the fact that Google’s search results are manipulated isn’t.

A little history.

The video below is from a leftist website known for outing the bad things that are illegal.

A non-partisan review appears below.

 

 

Google’s search engine is…

View original post 418 more words