Baltimore says its police will begin to accept "identity" documents issued by the Roman Catholic Archdiocese to illegal aliens.

A few days ago, the City of Baltimore announced that it would begin to accept "identity" documents issued by the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Baltimore to "undocumented immigrants and other vulnerable people that the Baltimore Police Department has agreed to recognize — a program activists hope will make people more willing to cooperate with law enforcement."

Given that immigrants are often the primary victims of crime committed by the predators in their own communities — such as members of transnational gangs like Mara Salvatrucha (MS-13) or the Latin Kings — logic would dictate that they have every incentive to cooperate, with or without home-brew identity cards.

Then there is the question of the legitimacy of such "identity" documents. The requirements for procuring one are basic enough, according to the Sun:

To qualify for a card, an applicant will need to have been a member of a parish for three months, present other identity documents and have a witness testify to their identity. The cards will be linked to parish membership records, but there will not be a specific database of cardholders, which could guard against any future attempt by federal immigration officials to track cardholders.

If the whole premise of this enterprise is to give "undocumented and other vulnerable" individuals an identity document they can use in their dealings with police or other city offices, then exactly what "other identity documents" will they be presenting to get that parish document? If, on the other hand, they have other documents to establish identity, wouldn't those be the first, best proof of one's identity in dealing with officialdom?

Another question:Will the city and archdiocese be cooperating in such a program to give identity documents to homeless and dispossessed citizens?

If not, why not? Why the disparate treatment?

https://www.cis.org/Cadman/Faux-Identity-Documents-Illegal-Immigrants-Archdiocese-Baltimore

China tariffs explained:

What is a Section 301 investigation?

As part of the Trade Act of 1974, Section 301 gives the U.S. trade representative authority to investigate and, with the president’s direction, respond to another country’s unfair trade practices. This Section 301 investigation included a thorough analysis of evidence, public hearings, consultation with private sector advisory committees, and input from academics, trade associations and U.S. workers.

What led President Trump to initiate the Section 301 investigation?

The United States has worked for 14 years through various types of economic dialogues to resolve persistent issues with China’s trade policies and practices. But China has failed to bring about any fundamental shift in its policies, including its technology transfer practices. On August 14, 2017, President Trump determined that decisive action must be taken to protect U.S. businesses from China’s harmful actions. Initiating a Section 301 investigation under the Trade Act of 1974 gave USTR broad authority to analyze and address China’s unfair trade practices.

What were the findings of the Section 301 investigation into China’s trade practices?

The investigation identified acts, policies and practices of the Chinese government that are unreasonable, are discriminatory and unfairly burden U.S. commerce. Those include these actions:

Using restrictions on foreign ownership to require or pressure U.S. companies to disclose or transfer technology to Chinese entities in order to access the Chinese market.

Imposing discriminatory technology licensing requirements that deny foreign patent holders, including U.S. companies, basic patent rights and unfairly favor Chinese recipients over U.S. technology owners.

Unfairly directing investment in and acquisition of U.S. companies with the goal of large-scale technology transfer. For example, a Chinese government fund backed Apex, a Chinese company, in acquiring Lexmark International, a U.S. computer and printer manufacturer. Before the acquisition, Lexmark had sued the consortium for infringing 15 patents.

Conducting and supporting cyber intrusions into U.S. companies to obtain intellectual property, trade secrets or confidential business information, as when five Chinese military hackers were charged with hacking U.S. commercial networks.

What products are affected by the tariffs?

The 25 percent tariff targets industries that benefit from China’s unfair trade policies.

The sectors subject to the proposed tariffs include industries such as aerospace, information and communication technology, robotics and machinery.

In remarks at the signing of the March 22 presidential memorandum, Vice President Pence said, “The United States of America is taking targeted and focused action to protect not only American jobs, but America’s technology, which will power and drive an innovation economy for decades to come.”

If Harvard admitted students based solely on the applicant scoring in the top decile of an "academic index" (=test scores + HS performance), the racial/ethnic composition of its freshman class would be expected to change as follows:

White:-6%

Black:-94%

Hispanic:-82%

Asian:+108%

https://samv91khoyt2i553a2t1s05i-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Doc-415-2-Arcidiacono-Rebuttal-Report.pdf

Caravan:2 Planes Filled With 500 Mexican Federal Agents Arrive At thier Border W/Riot Gear & Instructions ‘Do Not Enter Or Be Detained’ All Signs Point To President Trump’s Warning.

This Is Historic For Mexico! Thank You!

https://twitter.com/Jamierodr10/status/1052880869566939136?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1052880869566939136&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Ftheconservativetreehouse.com%2F2018%2F10%2F18%2Foctober-18th-2018-presidential-politics-trump-administration-day-637%2F