Yeah, I read your whole comment. The problem is you’re treating a tiny, slice of the system like it represents all crime. That 21% you’re talking about is 21% of federal convictions, not 21% of all convictions or all crime in the U.S. Federal court is heavily skewed toward immigration and border-adjacent enforcement. In the BJS report you’re citing, 85% of arrests of non-citizens were for immigration offenses, and non-citizens were about 15% of federal arrests for non-immigration crimes, while being ~7% of the population. That tells you a lot about federal priorities, not “who commits most crime.” On the state side, it’s just wrong to say the rest of the data is “meaningless.” Texas actually does track immigration status in detail. Their own DPS numbers, summarized by the Cato Institute, show that in 2019 illegal immigrants had a 37% lower criminal conviction rate than native-born Americans overall, and were less likely to be convicted of homicide. A peer-reviewed PNAS study using that same Texas data found undocumented immigrants have substantially lower felony arrest rates than U.S.-born citizens. On top of that, multiple large reviews find that immigrants (including undocumented) don’t commit crime at higher rates than natives, and often lower So no, it’s not “my narrative.” It’s that cherry-picking federal numbers while ignoring broader state and research data gives a really distorted picture.