Immigration enforcement has collapsed under Trump. Non-criminal removals are below the numbers of the Bush administration.…
Democratic cities and states learned how to oppose federal immigration enforcement policy under the Obama administration where they had a lot of practice. Those jurisdictions then ramped it up in opposition to Trump. Combined with Trumpian blundering, y’all got this result.
OTOH, Trump was much more successful reducing legal immigration. He radically reduced the number of greencards issued to immigrants abroad.…
What does this all mean? Trump was a great president for voters opposed to LEGAL immigration, but he was not as opposed to ILLEGAL immigration.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with (((The Alex Nowrasteh)))

(((The Alex Nowrasteh))) Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @AlexNowrasteh

13 Jan
A common counter-theme is that the Capitol insurrectionists were punished more harshly than the BLM rioters, or at least criticized more. 1/
According to that narrative, BLM rioters ran roughshod in American cities & received zero punishment so of course the Capitol Putschists thought they could get away with it. 2/
Obviously, the BLM rioters were awful & they deserve(d) to be punished for the harm they committed – but is this true? How can we approach understanding this? 3/
Read 10 tweets
11 Jan
For those who think twitter is a monopoly. How is twitter reducing output to raise prices to make a supernormal profit? Image
“By monopoly, I mean to use the word incorrectly in order to own the libs.”
Even if it were a monopoly [insert magic here], the contestable market theory pushes against that strongly. Evidence is Parler.
Read 4 tweets
9 Jun 20
Does anyone seriously believe that COVID-19 wouldn’t have spread if the CCP didn’t briefly attempt to cover it up?

People/govs don’t take pandemics seriously until they’re pandemics. Assuming the US would’ve acted better w/ more warning is fanciful.…
What does this even mean? There’s a lot of evidence that the 1918 pandemic started in Kansas, how would that have been a policy failure for the US at the time?
Many countries, including the US, have severe travel & immigration restrictions on China. Trump has raised tariffs (that Americans pay). They’re the most closed off they’ve been since joining the WTO.
Read 14 tweets
16 Mar 19
Since 2002, right-wing terrorists have murdered 66 people in the U.S. During the same time, Islamist terrorists have murdered 107. Murders in RW terrorist attacks have increased in recent years, but so have deaths in Islamist attacks.
In 2015-2017, murders by Islamist terrorists outnumbered murders by RW terrorists (80-19). In 2018, murders by RW terrorists outnumbered those by Islamist terrorists (12-0).
I included anti-abortion, nationalists, white nationalists, and white supremacists/Nazis in the RW definition.
Read 7 tweets
22 Jun 18
Thread --> President Trump's press event with the Angel Families was shameless political showmanship intended to show the world that illegal immigrants are a serious criminal threat. However, all the evidence we have shows that illegal immigrants are less crime-prone than natives
Our first point comes from Texas, which tracks criminal convictions/arrests by legal status. As a percentage of their respective populations, there were 56 percent fewer criminal convictions of illegal immigrants than of native-born Americans in 2015.…
We also separated it out by crime. In 2015, homicide conviction rates for illegal and legal immigrants were 25 percent and 87 percent below those of natives, respectively. This is also as a percent of their respective populations.
Read 11 tweets
22 Feb 18
The chance of being murdered by a foreign-born terrorist in an attack on US soil is 1 in 3.4 million per year (1982-2018). The chance of being murdered in a mass shooting during that time is 1 in 12.9 million per year (excluding San Bernardino terror). Both are small hazards.
Mass shootings prompt debates over gun control but they only account for a fraction of a percent of all homicides annually. Control advocates have much better arguments for restricting gun ownership than mass shootings (I disagree with them, but they have serious arguments).
To the people affected, the hazard of mass shootings is the only one. I understand that. These tweets will make me no friends but it’s important to realize the scale of this problem. Only then can we actually compare the costs of private gun ownership to the benefits.
Read 6 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!