RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://amgreatness.com/2024/10/03/the-new-data-on-migrant-crime/

This article was originally published by RealClearPolitics and made available via RealClearWire.

he new data on all the criminal noncitizens coming into the U.S. is shocking.

The U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) checks the background of illegal aliens they have in custody. But, the administration’s letter to Rep. Tony Gonzales (R-TX) shows that as of July 21, 2024, ICE let 435,719 convicted criminals and 226,847 people with pending criminal charges in their home countries into the U.S.

Of those cleared by ICE, 13,099 have convictions for homicide, and another 1,845 were facing criminal charges. Some 9,461 have convictions for sex offenses (not including assault or commercialized sex), and 2,659 face pending charges. The convictions include other crimes such as assault (62,231), robbery (10,031), sexual assault (15,811), weapons offenses (13,423), and dangerous drugs (56,533).

About 7.4 million noncitizens are in the “national docket data,” so 662,776 is 9% of the total, and if one extrapolates the numbers to the homicide rate in this country, it strongly indicates that the government is letting migrants into this country who commit murder at a rate 50% higher than the rest of the U.S. population.

And these numbers clearly underestimate the crime rate of these noncitizens. The noncitizens in the “national docket data” turned themselves in to border agents for processing or were caught. Those who don’t turn themselves in are obviously far more likely to have something to hide from those doing the processing, so-called “gotaways,” who are observed illegally entering the U.S. but not caught or turned back.

These figures coincide with other data from the Arizona prison system and show illegal aliens commit crime at much higher rates than Americans or legal immigrants.

Under the Remain-in-Mexico policy, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) did background checks on immigrants’ cases, including contacting the country that the immigrant is from before they are approved to come to the U.S.

ICE agents cannot access the same databases to check on the immigrants, and they didn’t contact the immigrant’s home country. Plus, the massive inflow of immigrants has overwhelmed the system. The Deputy Director for ICE blames the “enormous workload”  agents face, so they haven’t been able to do even the limited background checks they are doing. There are so many coming in that the government can’t house these immigrants until their backgrounds are properly checked.

ICE processed these criminals as they entered the country, but it didn’t identify them as criminals, so it released them into the country. Now, they are just walking around freely in the United States, and no one knows where they are.

It took over six months for the Biden administration to finally respond to a congressional request for these numbers. The deputy director for ICE “apologized” for the delay.

https://www.frontpagemag.com/state-department-aiding-illegals/

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is primarily responsible for the invasion of some 10 million illegals, approximately the population of Portugal, with no criminal background checks. Rep. Darrell Issa, California Republican and member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, charges that the State Department is encouraging foreign nationals to avoid seeking asylum in Mexico and instead enter the United States at “federal taxpayers’ expense.”

The State Department operates the Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration (PRM), which funds legal representation and counseling related to immigration proceedings. The PRM channels funds through non-profits and the UN Refugee Agency. Julia Valls Noyes, assistant secretary for the PRM, told Issa that the US government was not funding the non-profits and aiding in immigration activities.

“Your department is responsible for giving us knowingly false information,” Issa told Valls Noyes, pointing out that money is “fungible.” She acknowledged that some presentations would have been illegal but denied that they were funded by PRM. Issa wasn’t going for it.

“All the people involved in this have to be fleshed out,” Issa told a recent hearing. “It’s about not quitting until you have the truth and not quitting until people who attempt to obfuscate or hide have been held accountable.” This deceit has not received the attention it deserves and a key back story about a strange “migrant” also needs to be fleshed out.

https://san.com/cc/ice-confirms-hundreds-of-thousands-of-migrant-criminal-convictions/

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) data shows that more than 13,000 undocumented immigrants with murder convictions have been apprehended and released into the United States. ICE is currently tracking 425,000 migrants who have criminal convictions but are not in federal custody.

Additionally, 222,000 migrants have pending criminal charges against them, according to the data.

Among the migrants released into the U.S., 13,099 are convicted murderers and 1,845 more face pending homicide charges. Nearly 15,845 migrants have convictions for sex crimes, while another 4,250 have pending sexual assault charges.

The figures are sourced from ICE’s “non-detained docket,” which includes migrants encountered by border officials but not in custody. Those individuals were released with a court date or ordered to be deported but remain in the U.S.

The internal data, shared by the ICE deputy director, also shows that 56,533 migrants have drug charges, 2,521 have been convicted of kidnapping, 62,231 have assault charges and 14,301 are convicted burglars.

Currently, there are more than 7 million migrants on ICE’s non-detained docket, with 647,000 of them having criminal convictions or pending charges.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/tens-thousands-illegal-immigrants-sexual-assault-homicide-convictions-roaming-us-streets

Tens of thousands of illegal immigrants with sex offenses and homicide convictions could be loose on the streets, according to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) data provided to lawmakers this week. 

The agency provided data to Rep. Tony Gonzales, R-Texas, about national data for illegal immigrants with criminal charges or convictions. The data, as of July 2024, is broken down by those in detention, and those who are not in detention — known as the non-detained docket.  The non-detained docket includes illegal immigrants who have final orders of removal or are going through removal proceedings but are not detained in ICE custody. There are currently more than 7 million people on that docket.

The data says that, among those not in detention, there are 425,431 convicted criminals and 222,141 with pending criminal charges.

Those include 62,231 convicted of assault, 14,301 convicted of burglary, 56,533 with drug convictions and 13,099 convicted of homicide. An additional 2,521 have kidnapping convictions and 15,811 have sexual assault convictions. 

There are an additional 1,845 with pending homicide charges, 42,915 with assault charges, 3,266 with burglary charges and 4,250 with assault charges.

“As of July 21, 2024, there were 662,566 noncitizens with criminal histories on ICE’s national docket—13,099 criminally convicted MURDERS!” Gonzales said in a statement. “Americans deserve to be SAFE in our own communities.”

In a statement accompanying the latter, ICE took aim at so-called “sanctuary” cities, which refuse to cooperate with federal law enforcement in deporting illegal immigrant criminals.

https://www.city-journal.org/article/the-real-questions-of-the-immigration-debate

Political campaigns are symbolic ventures, designed to drive attention to certain issues and to marshal facts, language, and emotion to deliver a material advantage. From Cicero’s campaign for the consulship to Kamala Harris and Donald Trump’s campaigns for the presidency, it has always been thus.

This is a useful lens through which to view the current immigration debate. For several weeks, two migrant-related stories have dominated national attention: Venezuelan gang members apparently seizing apartments in Aurora, Colorado, and tensions resulting from large-scale Haitian migration in Springfield, Ohio. Beneath the surface of their rhetorical heat, the controversies point to three key questions of immigration policy: who, how, and how much.

Let’s first clear away some misconceptions. Both Trump and Harris’s stated views on immigration—which may not, of course, reflect their actual views—are more nuanced than commonly portrayed. In 2021, Harris warned illegal migrants that “if you come to our border, you will be turned back,” acknowledging, at least rhetorically, that Americans have the right to decide who enters the country. Likewise, Trump, despite his restrictionist reputation, often interleaves calls to “build the wall” with appeals to build a “big, beautiful door.” In other words, between the candidates, the questions of who, how, and how much are ordinal, rather than categorical.

The first and most controversial of those questions is “who.” Progressives believe that human beings are interchangeable, and that all differences are socially constructed and ultimately arbitrary. At first glance, this position seems grounded in the theory of natural right encapsulated in the Declaration of Independence’s famous phrase, “all men are created equal.”

But this ignores a critical distinction. Yes, all men are born equal—that is, they are all born with the same human fundamentals—but this does not imply that all cultures, or civilizations, are equal. Culture is the product of tradition, not unmediated nature. Among the principles that cultures adopt and inculcate in their members, some are better, others are worse; some are compatible with America’s traditions, some are not. For American immigration policy, this means that the “who” matters.

The question of “who” has historically involved considering migrants’ national origin. A more refined approach would include other characteristics, such as educational attainment, employment history, language skills, and cultural values. The United States, which has an interest in admitting immigrants capable of integration and economic productivity, is well within its rights to prefer, say, an English-speaking software developer from Venezuela over a violent, uneducated gang member from the same country.