Tea at Trianon: Illegal Aliens Commit More Crime Than Citizens, The Data Democrats Are Hiding

John Wilson Croker on Marie-Antoinette

"We have followed the history of Marie Antoinette with the greatest diligence and scrupulosity. We have lived in those times. We have talked with some of her friends and some of her enemies; we have read, certainly not all, but hundreds of the libels written against her; and we have, in short, examined her life with– if we may be allowed to say so of ourselves– something of the accuracy of contemporaries, the diligence of inquirers, and the impartiality of historians, all combined; and we feel it our duty to declare, in as a solemn a manner as literature admits of, our well-matured opinion that every reproach against the morals of the queen was a gross calumny– that she was, as we have said, one of the purest of human beings."

~from History of the Guillotine by John Wilson Croker, 1844

Edmund Burke on Marie-Antoinette

"It is now sixteen or seventeen years since I saw the queen of France, then dauphiness, at Versailles; and surely there never lighted on this orb, which she hardly seemed to touch, a more delightful vision. I saw her just above the horizon, decorating and cheering the elevated sphere she had just begun to move in, glittering like a morning star full of life and splendor and joy. Oh, what a revolution....Little did I dream that I should have lived to see such disasters fall upon her, in a nation of gallant men, in a nation of men of honor and of cavaliers! I thought ten thousand swords must have leaped from their scabbards, to avenge even a look which threatened her with insult. But the age of chivalry is gone; that of sophisters, economists, and calculators has succeeded...."

~Edmund Burke, October 1790

Friday, February 27, 2026

Illegal Aliens Commit More Crime Than Citizens, The Data Democrats Are Hiding

From Amuse on X:

Public debate over immigration and crime often proceeds as if one empirical claim has been decisively settled. We are told, with confidence and repetition, that illegal immigrants commit crime at lower rates than American citizens. The claim is treated as a conversation stopper. Once uttered, it is meant to end inquiry. If the data show lower rates, then immigration enforcement is unnecessary, even unjust. Yet this posture assumes something that has not been demonstrated. It assumes that the data measure what they purport to measure. When all crimes committed by illegal aliens are counted, including immigration offenses, crimes obscured by deportation, and offenses suppressed by systematic underreporting, the rate of criminality attributable to illegal immigrants far exceeds that of citizens. The apparent lower rate is not a discovery about behavior. It is a byproduct of selective counting.
Policymakers are trained to ask a simple question before accepting any statistical claim. What exactly is being counted? Consider an analogy. Suppose a hospital wishes to know whether a new medication reduces heart attacks. It counts the number of patients currently in cardiac wards. If, however, a substantial number of patients who suffer heart attacks are immediately transferred to another facility and removed from the hospital’s census, then a snapshot of current ward occupancy will systematically undercount the true incidence. The hospital will report success, but the apparent success will be an artifact of removal, not a reduction in harm.
Almost all immigration and crime literature relies on an analogous snapshot. The most widely cited studies use incarceration data from the Census or the American Community Survey. They ask who is in prison at a given moment and then compare incarceration rates across native born citizens and noncitizens. But incarceration is a stock measure, not a flow measure. It tells us who is physically present in custody at the time of the survey. It does not tell us who committed crimes and was then removed from the country. (Read more.)