While I appreciate your position I must respectfully disagree...This article from 2018 because there really is not much put out about the issue anymore... Intentionally extracted or withheld..??

Non-citizens constitute only about 7 percent of the U.S. population. Yet the latest data from the Justice Department’s Bureau of Justice Statistics reveals that non-citizens accounted for nearly two-thirds (64 percent) of all federal arrests in 2018. Just two decades earlier, only 37 percent of all federal arrests were non-citizens.

These arrests aren’t just for immigration crimes. Non-citizens accounted for 24 percent of all federal drug arrests, 25 percent of all federal property arrests, and 28 percent of all federal fraud arrests.

In 2018, a quarter of all federal drug arrests took place in the five judicial districts along the U.S.-Mexico border. This reflects the ongoing activities of Mexican drug cartels. Last year, Mexican citizens accounted for 40 percent of all federal arrests.

In fact, more Mexicans than U.S. citizens were arrested on charges of committing federal crimes in 2018.

Migrants from Central American countries are also accounting for a larger share of federal arrests, going from a negligible 1 percent of such arrests in 1998 to 20 percent today.

Critics will try to downplay the importance of the Justice Department’s report by pointing out that the majority of crimes in the United States are handled by prosecutors in state and local courts. But even there the data is shocking.

A recent report from the Texas Department of Public Safety revealed that 297,000 non-citizens had been “booked into local Texas jails between June 1, 2011 and July 31, 2019.” So these are non-citizens who allegedly committed local crimes, not immigration violations.

The report noted that a little more than two-thirds (202,000) of those booked in Texas jails were later confirmed as i*****l i*******ts by the federal government.

According to the Texas report, over the course of their criminal careers those i*****l i*******ts were charged with committing 494,000 criminal offenses.

Some of these cases are still being prosecuted, but the report states that there have already been over 225,000 convictions. Those convictions represent: 500 homicides; 23,954 assaults; 8,070 burglaries; 297 kidnappings; 14,178 thefts; 2,026 robberies; 3,122 sexual assaults; 3,840 sexual offenses; 3,158 weapon charges and tens of thousands of drug and obstruction charges.. <snip> more to the article..

https://www.heritage.org/crime-and-justice/commentary/crimes-illegal-immigrants-widespread-across-us-sanctuaries-shouldnt shield them

Another for comparison purposes..it goes to 2019 stats in pros and cons...

https://immigration.procon.org/questions/does-illegal-immigration-relate-to-higher-crime-incidence/

And finally another for consideration~~ can we believe anything???

There is no nationwide data on crimes committed specifically by “i*****l i*******ts”. However, the alleged number of Americans k**led as stated in this claim is much higher than any available information on crime.

FBI records show that in the year 2018 the total number of murders and nonnegligent manslaughters in the U.S. was 16,214 (as listed here ). Therefore, for the claimed data to be true, 62% of the homicides of that year would have been committed by “i*****l i*******ts”. According to the Pew Research Center (here ), “unauthorised immigrants” only represent around 3.2% of the U.S. population. <snip> more to read

https://www.google.com/amp/s/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKCN20L2CF

Thank you for the respectful disagreement and that information.

I don't know all those things. Maybe you've done more thorough research than I have. I had previously encountered one study, but did not make the effort to dig it up this time.

I see that the last of the sources you listed debunks a couple of widely-circulated claims.

Regarding "can we believe anything?", I find (generally, out in the world) that some information and some sources are more credible than some others; but _all_ may be subject to errors _and_ corruptions. (Even more dismaying, I began to realize that I myself might be corrupt or corrupted -- for most people, it's part of the human condition.) I believe some of them, but realize that I could be fooled.

Sometimes a thing is so well corroborated, and logical, that it seems safe to believe it fully and without doubt.

Some other things are not only false, they've actually been proven false. Examples:

I have a relative who frequently posts things I disagree with. One of them was a video with a transcript and commentary. By studying the video carefully I was able to debunk it, because it wasn't consistent with itself. It took a lot of time to do that. I carefully explained it to her, and she could have verified what I said. She paid no attention to my explanation (said it was too long to read) and instead just kept sending me videos that were _longer_ than what I'd written to her personally and privately.

Several days later she publicly posted an erroneous (and, again, very misleading) news article (which looked like it came from a respectable newspaper, and maybe really did). I was able to debunk that one by checking original sources of information. I posted that second careful debunking as a public reply, which appeared along with the fewer than a dozen other replies she got from other folks. She doesn't seem to have noticed.

It would be a waste of time to try to keep up with all the stuff she posts. After debunking those two, I'm ignoring all the rest of her posts.

A few false facts might be forgiven as mere errors. That may depend on how misleading and harmful they are.

Aside from factual information, there are also values and principles, and we place some amount of faith in those.

Thank you for the respectful disagreement and that information.

I don't know all those things. Maybe you've done more thorough research than I have. I had previously encountered one study, but did not make the effort to dig it up this time.

I see that the last of the sources you listed debunks a couple of widely-circulated claims.

Regarding "can we believe anything?", I find (generally, out in the world) that some information and some sources are more credible than some others; but _all_ may be subject to errors _and_ corruptions. (Even more dismaying, I began to realize that I myself might be corrupt or corrupted -- for most people, it's part of the human condition.) I believe some of them, but realize that I could be fooled.

Sometimes a thing is so well corroborated, and logical, that it seems safe to believe it fully and without doubt.

Some other things are not only false, they've actually been proven false. Examples:

I have a relative who frequently posts things I disagree with. One of them was a video with a transcript and commentary. By studying the video carefully I was able to debunk it, because it wasn't consistent with itself. It took a lot of time to do that. I carefully explained it to her, and she could have verified what I said. She paid no attention to my explanation (said it was too long to read) and instead just kept sending me videos that were _longer_ than what I'd written to her personally and privately.

Several days later she publicly posted an erroneous (and, again, very misleading) news article (which looked like it came from a respectable newspaper, and maybe really did). I was able to debunk that one by checking original sources of information. I posted that second careful debunking as a public reply, which appeared along with the fewer than a dozen other replies she got from other folks. She doesn't seem to have noticed.

It would be a waste of time to try to keep up with all the stuff she posts. After debunking those two, I'm ignoring all the rest of her posts.

A few false facts might be forgiven as mere errors. That may depend on how misleading and harmful they are.

Aside from factual information, there are also values and principles, and we place some amount of faith in those.