Clueless Trump has no idea what he’s tweeting and the DOJ knows exactly how to spin useless data.
Okay. Are we having a problem with convicting non-foreign born terrorists? I don’t know because a “tweet” doesn’t give me that information. The operative word here would be convicted.
But…but, if we step back and look at where Donny got this info:
Well, that changes things a bit, doesn’t it. Forgot the word international, didn’t ya Donny. Three out of four convicted of international terrorism were foreign born. That’s like saying: three out of four people convicted of vehicular manslaughter were driving a car. It makes you wonder what the other 1/4 were doing. To convict someone of international terrorism, someone’s gonna have to be foreign born, right? It follows that to commit international terrorism, someone has to leave their nation, don’t they? I mean you can’t have three masterminds operating from their computer in some foreign land, all directing one mule, right?
But …but, if we step back even further and look at how the DOJ got the information for their tweet:
Today, the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) released a report, revealing that three out of every four, or 402, individuals convicted of international terrorism-related charges in U.S. federal courts between September 11, 2001, and December 31, 2016 were foreign-born.
That’s from the DOJ website and that’s 27 people a year. Twenty-seven (27). Further breakdown:
- 254 were not U.S. citizens;
- 148 were foreign-born, naturalized and received U.S. citizenship; and,
- 147 were U.S. citizens by birth.
That’s 17 people a year, not residents of the US, that may have been found guilty of defacing a sign out in front of an embassy with political hate speech and charged as a terrorist.
With the DOJ and White House so goddamn focused on the phantom boogeyman, we see very little if any resources or promotion dedicated to actual, real, on-going threats.
The CRS report raises several key issues related to improving U.S. domestic terrorism policy. They include: (1) federal agencies employ varying terminology and definitions to describe domestic terrorist threats; (2) the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the FBI do not officially designate domestic terrorist organizations; (3) few, if any, domestic terrorists are charged or prosecuted under federal or state terrorism statutes; (4) domestic terrorists, for the most part, do not use traditional terrorist tactics such as bombings, large-scale attacks, airplane hijackings, or political assassinations; (5) foreign-inspired homegrown violence gets more media attention than acts of domestic terrorism; and, (6) domestic extremist ideology often uses the cover of constitutionally protected activity.
Another persistent issue relates to the disparity in federal and state prosecution and sentencing of Al Qaeda-inspired terrorists in the U.S. versus domestic terrorists. Outside of eco-terrorist cases, there have been virtually no violent domestic extremists charged or prosecuted under federal or state terrorism statutes which offer penalty enhancements for suspects engaging in domestic terrorist plotting or terrorist-related activity. Most domestic terrorists are charged under existing firearms, arson, and explosives laws, rather than a terrorism statute.
What should we be concerned about? The boogeyman, or the real issue? And what is the real issue? It’s not just that domestic terrorism far and away is our biggest, actual terrorism concern, it’s that our government is turning into an arm of the administration’s ideological propaganda.
Within this report, the DOJ is promoting the administration’s policies. This is part of the DOJ’s report of the nearly inconsequential nature of “foreign-born terrorists,” and thereby, an official statement:
“This report reveals an indisputable sobering reality—our immigration system has undermined our national security and public safety,” said Attorney General Sessions. “And the information in this report is only the tip of the iceberg: we currently have terrorism-related investigations against thousands of people in the United States, including hundreds of people who came here as refugees. Our law enforcement professionals do amazing work, but it is simply not reasonable to keep asking them to risk their lives to enforce the law while we admit thousands every year without sufficient knowledge about their backgrounds. The pillars of President Trump’s immigration policy—securing our porous borders, moving to a merit-based immigration system that ends the use of diversity visas and chain migration, and enforcing our nation’s laws—will make their jobs easier and make the United States a safer place.”