Arrest made in Mollie Tibbetts murder, suspect held on federal immigration detainer, reports say


Fox says that it’s all on video and that the Illegal is being held and has been here for forty seven years!

The video, apparently shows Tibbet’s trying to escape and being chased down by the guy.


For accuracy sake: I may have ‘misheard’ that 47 years statement and it should be 4 to 7 years!


I hated seeing this but it’s all over the internet now.

It’s a shame that more and more young folks are thinking this way.

I’m sure that she learned this as a college student.


The comment sounds ironic, not serious.


Oh, it was serious. Her Twitter has a bunch of Left-wing stuff.

Viva la Mexico


Amanda Marcotte is blaming it on men — which tribe is it?


In terms of violence, there’s no doubt that dirt world men are much more prone to it than women.


Trick question; tribes is the wrong frame to begin with.

You begin with the individual, and you certainly don’t blame a women fleeing violence in Guatemala for what this man did, and claim it’s equally valid to keep both out.


Why don’t “these women fleeing violence in Guatemala” go to an American consulate or embassy and APPLY for sanctuary? If they can travel 2000 miles through all of Mexico in order to sneak across OUR borders, they CERTAINLY can go a couple of hundred miles to our embassy or consulate. The answer, of course, is that they are NOT “fleeing violence.” They’re trying to get here so they can cash in on the goodies that we offer them if they are successful…and yes, that INCLUDES comparatively good-paying jobs.


They did:

Dave, if you want to criticize them, there’s no excuse for acting on bad or incomplete information. Quit doing that.


Is too important, for you to be mischaracterizing them out of hand.


BS again, AS. NOWHERE in the article does it say they first went to an embassy or consulate IN Central America before deciding to trek that 2,000 miles to our border. Maybe YOU ought to get your facts straight before criticizing others.


Eat your crow:

“U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions beefed up legal resources on the border this week to handle people from the caravan.”

You can even look for other articles:

“Dozens more Central American caravan migrants were let into the United States to begin pleading their case for asylum on Thursday despite sharp criticism from U.S. President Donald Trump, bringing the total to 158 since last weekend.”

"A baby traveling with a caravan of migrants from Central America sleeps under a plastic tarp at a camp near the San Ysidro checkpoint as he expected to apply for asylum, in Tijuana, Mexico May 3, 2018. "

No excuses now Dave.


Those dirt world women raised those dirt world men. So they’re obviously bad mothers at a minimum. The problems reflect their group quality which both contribute to. Men in general commit more violence. This is a fact and it’s true of domestic men as well. To say nothing of the drastically higher welfare utilization rates of those women which far outstrips the men.

It’s not like there’s just one reason they’re a bad choice to add to the country. It’s a whole rainbow of reasons.

I certainly don’t want this woman here. She’s liable to bring her entire family here, and then make new enemies with the local domestic gangs. Her children will probably end up as troublesome as her husband. Trouble tends to find those who earn it. The more people we take from bad places, the more our country grows to resemble their country.


Are you REALLY this obtuse? WHERE in the article that you posted does it claim that these “asylum-seekers” went first to a consulate or embassy in their OWN COUNTRY??? The article also fails to acknowledge that over 80% of these claimants were DENIED asylum status.


Are you? Where is it illegal to apply for asylum on the border?

They’re following the law Dave, what are you complaining about?

And yes, many of them applied for asylum, in Mexico, to get into the U.S., that has also happened.

  1. Disgust sensitivity. That’s all your broadcasting to me. You’re not giving me facts, just rationalizations for the former.

  2. Temperament. Immigrants don’t represent the average cross section of their nation, they’re people with a bent towards conscientiousness.

That’s why Ukrainians who live here have massively different politics than Ukrainians who live in Ukraine. Ergo, the best way to look at immigrants, is basically as partisans. People who thought differently than most of their compatriots, and that lead to them wanting to be somewhere different.

They’re a self-selecting group. Even among refugees, we can find this happening.

Nope, Immigrant populations are more docile, they’re more sensitive to the fact that they have things to lose.

Natives who have been on welfare for generations are far more violent. Why? Because the former has yet to discover anything that makes them think they can’t climb social mobility. Just by getting here, they’re already going up in the world.

The latter however knows they aren’t going anywhere, because they haven’t been, for generations.

On pure behavior and temperament alone, immigrant are > poor natives.

Also Cwolf, keep in mind that Peterson himself attributes his toleration at the University of Toronto, to the fact it’s a school with a predominantly immigrant clientele, who have far less time for the native Post-modern dumb****ery, and just want to get the credentials to get the job. A utilitarian mindset ushered in by work-focused foreigners. What a concept.

Yeah, because we have Irish gangs that still haunt us (?). It’s not like social mobility scrapes away crime overtime.

Lord help us if we think long term. Or about what happens when you pull a Russia, and see your population steadily die off.

Or how empty a claim “cultural purity” is, when you see said culture become decrepit of its own accord. Men hiding away, women living as childless parasitic singles well into their 30s, social cohesion coming undone… like a real life Universe 25.

Which is the same lazy, broad-brush argument people make for using abortions to get rid of undesirables (read here: poor minorities). Itself setting off our demographic woes, and leaving older generations want of purpose.

Sorry Dude, I don’t buy anti-humanist means, to reach humanist ends. It’s counter-productive. It’s half the reason why our wars for Democracy around the world didn’t work.


ONLY those who apply from asylum at a PORT OF ENTRY are processed as “asylum-seekers” who haven’t first done so at a consulate or embassy. LOTS of those in this so-called “caravan” snuck across the border elsewhere and, when caught, THEN started screaming “asylum.”


Lol, no

From the actual crime stats we have lifetime odds of imprisonment for men:
White: 6%
Latino: 17%
Latino women: 2.2%
White women: 0.9%

Those numbers are somewhat more favorable than the reality, since Mexicans only make up 2/3 of “Hispanics” and they have a much higher poverty rate(over 2x higher) than Cubans and South Americans

Let me guess, you have someone from Cato/Mother Jones/Goodgoy that says “As illegal immigration has risen, the overall crime rate has fallen - and thus illegals commit fewer crimes”

I actually agree with this. People who are poor for multiple generations are of poor stock. I don’t expect 95% of them to ever make themselves into anything. When your great grandfather failed, your grandfather failed, and your father failed, you really shouldn’t even exist.

And before the age of government welfare - you wouldn’t have. Your father never would have found a woman and his loser genes would die out. Thanks to the wonders of welfare, even the most incapable people can continue to reproduce and toss new generations onto the doles for the productive people to prop up.

We are unfortunately stuck with our poor people. There is no good reason to import poor people from regions that are also failing. Which is why I want people from India and Nigeria, not people from Afghanistan and Zimbabwe.

If the typical Zimbabwe immigrant is better than the ones who stay there - awesome. Maybe he can immigrate to Turkey. And then perhaps his daughter can immigrate to America.

Let a 3rd and 4th tier country sort through 5th tier immigrants. 1st tier countries should be looking for 1st tier talent. And that’s going to be a tiny portion of people in Tanzania. We have plenty of people who want to come here from Lebanon and Finland. We don’t need Bangladesh.

This is why Goldman Sacs recruits out of Stanford and not Boise State, and certainly not a GED class in Mississippi. Because the amount of talent you find in one is a lot higher than the other. You have limited recruiting time and resources and they should be prioritized based on averages.


Uh, yes:

Racial quotas aren’t relevant for determining what a “native” is.

In the State of Texas, rates of larceny, murder, and even simpler arrests are smaller than natives. For both legals and illegals.

It’s not about poor stock, it’s about welfare creating games where people are put into cycles of dependency, that punish them if they try to escape.

When you don’t create those games, people advance themselves. Hence Jason Riley’s book “Please Stop Helping Us”.

First, manpower demands in areas of the country that are depopulated question that. We’re helped by roaming migrant communities who don’t put down roots, but move place to to place, following the work.

It doesn’t help us to leave the jobs they work under or unstaffed. Them accessing that work, creates opportunity for Americans elsewhere in the economy.

Secondly, this is also where composition of temperament comes in.

Immigrants are self-selecting, more productive, more willing to work, more likely to take chances, and less likely to harm people.

Immigrants are disproportionate entrepreneurs in every country, as they over represent trait conscientiousness. Because people who are highly conscientious, and sense opportunity elsewhere, are more likely to be immigrants in the first place. Their productive drive is leading them.

If immigration is a business as you want to frame it, then I can point out that in a failing business the people who first and most often leave, are it’s most talented and capable.

That’s part to why Circuit City failed; it chased away its competent clerks and sales rep to save money. We know Zimbabwe did this, because it chased the only farmers it had who could produce better than subsistence, over the border into Mozambique, and who promptly started selling their goods into Zimbabwe, rather than the other way around.

If their good people are leaving, I see no reason not to soak them up.

And this is the clincher: we do have a point for letting uneducated immigrants in.

Education, doesn’t tell you much about temperment, it doesn’t answer manpower needs, it doesn’t acknowledge the division of labor that allows people to specialize in the first place.

I posted a poll confirming a consensus among economists, that even low-skilled immigrants, create good for America.


  1. Migrant work parties are good (you fill shortages)
  2. Spuring on labor demand is good. (you increase economic activity, spurring wage and job growth)
  3. Increasing scale in the economy is good. (people can specialize more, and find better paying work for that specialty).
  4. Creating a wage premium for simply speaking English is good. (self-explanatory).

We have the evidence that this works; Singapore has a massively diverse ethnicity in its work force, and people there do better in living standards than we do.

Australia hasn’t seen an economic downturn in well over a decade, and they openly credit this in part to their high immigration rate, which is double ours.

If the economy you live in has less bottlenecks from either manpower or skills, your economy can keep doing more. It can keep growing more easily, which makes it easier for natives to find something that they can contribute to.

Well this doesn’t track reality.

Ivy League schools can serve as a powerful social networking platform, but they represent less and less where the actual talent comes from.


They certainly are in Texas, where a lot of 2nd, 3rd and 4th+ generation Mexicans are quite crime prone as well. I used national crime statistics that covered 3 decades. You counter with fuzzily defined stats(“native”) from one year, from one state.

Your critical thinking skills could use some work.

From the national crime stats covering 3 decades we have lifetime odds of imprisonment for men:
White: 6%
Latino: 17%
Latino women: 2.2%
White women: 0.9%

Except for the plain federal government crime statistics that say otherwise. Welfare utilization among Mexicans is higher than all but one native group. And they are certainly not more productive

They are just cheaper.
Meanwhile, compare them to Nigerians



I’m just so pointlessly racist against Mexicans. I can’t imagine why I don’t think they’re the hyper productive labor leaders as you do AS. I mean, all of the stats are on my side, but you have… opinions from open border academics, so I guess the tip goes to your side.

Surely I’m no match for the likes of Ross Douthat, and Alex Nowrasteh

These certainly look like the sort of men I want deciding America’s future.