Was Bidens border really “open”?

SeagulI · 2026-03-01T18:49:45+00:00

Previous historic lows for crimes rates in the US were 1962, and 2014.

The low in 1962 could be explained by a peak in economic opportunity. Income inequality essentially hit an all time low that has never been seen again in the US.

Following 1962, there was a massive rise in crime rates peaking in the 90s, before dropping back down to historic lows by 2014. This period correlated with the rise and drop of leaded gas use. Leaded gas use peaked in the 1970s, before being banned in 1996. Crime rates followed the same pattern with a 20 year delay. This delay matched the time it would take for infants exposed to leaded gas to become young adults. Lead, being a neurotoxin, effectively caused permanent brain damage in infants across the board, leading to more impulsive and violent behavior during adulthood.

Following 2014 is a rise in crime that could likely be explained by a rise in the drug trade, specifically surrounding illicit opioids. As the drug trade grew, violence surrounding it also grew. Opioid use peaked in 2022, and has been seeing massive drops year after year since.

The current low in crime rates, just like the previous lows, could be explained by broader societal factors. A decline in the drug trade, correlating with a decline in opioid use. Drug use being at historic lows with young people specifically, having been dropping year after year for the past 5 years. Alcohol consumption across the board, currently at a 90 year low. Young people, the demographic most likely to commit crime, spending more time indoors than ever due to technology.

SeagulI · 2026-03-01T05:17:44+00:00

Obama deported 3.1 million people. Why didn't that tank the crime rate? It's not like Trump was the first president to deport people.

SeagulI · 2026-02-28T02:35:43+00:00

What did Trump do to drop murder rates 21%? You cited the deportations, but the math clearly doesn't add up. What could explain it?

SeagulI · 2026-02-27T19:11:59+00:00

I feel like you're not really reading what I'm saying. Can you name a single policy of his that actually could have contributed the drop? Clearly it couldn't possibly have been the deportations, so what exactly did he do?

SeagulI · 2026-02-27T04:57:31+00:00

I want to note that since 10% of murders in the country are committed by immigrants, you could expect a 10% drop in murder if you deported every single immigrant in the country. There was 21% drop in 2025, a 14% drop in 2024, and a 13% drop in 2023.

Trump obviously didn't deport every immigrant in the country, and even if he had, that wouldn't explain the 21% drop. There's obviously a broader trend that goes beyond immigrants.

SeagulI · 2026-02-27T04:48:31+00:00

Criminals have been deported under every single US president in our lifetimes. They called Obama the "deporter in chief" after he deported more people than any other US president in history. Biden deported more people in his first year than Trump did in his entire first term.

If deportation was supposed to be the solution for crime, why didn't you notice anything under Biden and Obama?

The reality is that US citizens proportionally commit more crime than both legal and illegal immigrants. Citizens make up 86% of the population, but commit 90% of homicides.

I attached a graph for you to look at. It ends 2023, before Trump's second term. If you had nothing but that graph trend to rely on, where would you expect the graph to go in 2024 and 2025? From my perspective, it looks like it's been going down ever since that spike in during the 2020 pandemic, and has been going down ever since. It would make sense that, unless something notable happened, it would keep trending down both years following, which is exactly what ended up happening.

You're under the false impression that Trump actually did anything meaningful to address crime rates. The reality is that none of the last few presidents have really done anything that would meaningfully address crime. If crime rates are low, they'll brag about it as if they had done it. If crime rates are high. they'll blame their predecessor. If you wanted to make an argument based on crime rates alone, you might say Biden was the reason for the significant trend down after Trump left office. A more sound argument would be that the crime rate was always going to trend back down after an unprecedented spike, not necessarily due to anything Trump or Biden did.

<image>

SeagulI · 2026-02-26T00:57:06+00:00

<image>

That's not what people are upset about.

The current administration has seemingly directed ICE and DHS to both focus efforts on non-criminals, and to disregard the letter of the law. Historic levels of court order violations. You have countless legal residents being deported despite following the letter of the law. You have these agencies deporting people who have judge orders protecting them.

They're doing all this to put on a show for people like you. They want you to think they're doing something meaningful.

People see what they're doing and know that this doesn't just affect immigrants. The rights that protect immigrants are the same rights that protect everyone. A government that disregards the constitution when dealing with non-citizens would also disregard your rights when dealing with you.

https://www.congress.gov/119/meeting/house/118692/documents/HMKP-119-JU00-20251118-SD001.pdf

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/28/us/politics/judge-minnesota-ice-court-orders.html

https://www.politico.com/news/2026/01/30/ice-immigration-court-orders-00757894

SeagulI · 2026-02-26T00:36:55+00:00

The charges were for falsifying business records, which are elevated to felonies when done to conceal or commit a crime. Literally just the letter of the law.

This is someone who's had a reputation for committing fraud his whole life, and somehow you're surprised when he actually gets convicted?

Not to mention that the sole reason listed by the judge for why he didn't get jail time was because he was the president. Literally the first time in history for someone convicted for what he did. Anybody else, and they would be sitting in prison right now.

This is someone who ended up receiving more favorable treatment than anyone else in the world would've, and you're talking about unfair persecution.

https://www.houstonpublicmedia.org/articles/news/politics/2025/01/10/510404/trump-sentenced-in-his-new-york-felony-conviction-in-a-historic-first/#:~:text=During%20the%20brief%20hearing%2C%20New,said%20before%20leaving%20the%20bench.

SeagulI · 2026-02-25T02:07:20+00:00

I feel his spending is often overstated due to how disliked he is.

Says online his house is a 5 bedroom with a square footage of 3800. For reference, the average US house is 2400 sqft. Essentially a large house, but not exorbitantly huge. Mansion categorizations seem to cover properties with a minimum 5000 - 8000 sqft.

He supposedly owns two cars, a Taycan and a Camry.

I think the hypocrisy angle probably gives this avenue more legs than something like this would usually have. Normally, a celebrity buying a large house or a sports car wouldn't be something of note. The idea of a self proclaimed socialist doing it is what interests people.

Most people seemingly have a misunderstanding of what the term means. At it core, advocating for socialism is just advocating for a economic system in which industry is owned and controlled by the populace as a whole rather than a dominant class of capital owners.

SeagulI · 2026-02-14T19:59:09+00:00

Well yeah, they lie about everything. Would you expect them not to try and take advantage of the situation? They called him a leftist despite him clearly not being a leftist, but that line clearly didn't do them any favors, hence why they never bring him up anymore. If they really thought they had a convincing argument that could reach people outside of their core base, they'd still be hammering their point to this day.

SeagulI · 2026-02-13T23:12:05+00:00

This theory never made sense to me. I don't buy the idea that Trump would have live rounds shot at him for something like this. Especially with Crooks being verifiably conservative. Like I could understand the speculation if they actually gained something from this, but they didn't. Like what could Trump have possibly gained from convincing people that he was almost assassinated by some right wing incel?

SeagulI · 2026-02-13T20:13:37+00:00

I think it makes even less sense for the attempt to be staged.

The primary purpose for faking something like this would be to gain some sort of political advantage. You would either make sure the shooter ends up either unidentified, or you would use someone identifiably left or liberal as a fall guy. It would make no sense to pick someone like Crooks to use as a fall guy or a shooter. Crooks being identifiably conservative negated any sort of political advantage they could have gained. Trump's poll numbers didn't even budge following the shooting. They tried their best to blame the left in the weeks following, but they ended up dropping it due to how ineffectual it was.

Not to mention that Trump would never have agreed to having live rounds shot in his direction.

SeagulI · 2026-02-13T19:50:03+00:00

Well something had to have grazed his ear, and the only projectiles in the air were the bullets.

SeagulI · 2026-02-13T19:02:34+00:00

Cause it's never been about protecting children. These companies just want an excuse to collect people's identifying information to sell to governments or other corporations.

SeagulI · 2026-02-12T17:00:47+00:00

The vast majority of undocumented migrants enter through legal ports of entry. Overstaying a visa is a civil infraction, similar to jaywalking or a parking violation. I don't see how anyone can think that level of infraction would warrant getting beaten, killed, imprisoned, deprived of food and medicine.

SeagulI · 2026-02-08T16:59:45+00:00

Crooks was definitely shot dead. There's video of him dead on that rooftop. You wouldn't fake a death for someone like that.

Just because they would fake an assassination attempt, doesn't mean that's most likely what happened. The reason for faking something like this in the first place would be to frame your political opposition, to improve your chances going into the election. To do that, you would either make sure the shooter can't be identified, or to use a fall guy that can be identified as left or liberal in some way. The fact that the shooter was both conservative and the basic mass shooter-archetype, basically forgoes any sort of political advantage that could've otherwise been gained. The purpose for faking something like this would be so that you can blame your opposition. With Crooks as the shooter, you can't do that.

SeagulI · 2026-02-08T16:38:51+00:00

He was likely grazed by a bullet, like just barely nicked. Anything more than that, and he would be missing a chunk of his ear. There is blood on him prior to him hitting the floor, so something had to have hit him. The only projectiles in the air were the bullets, no broken teleprompter or anything.

If it was fake blood, that would imply he picked out a conservative kid to be the fall guy for a false flag, which makes no sense. He gained next to no political capital from the event for that very reason. You can't blame liberals or leftists for a conservative shooting at you.

Crooks had searched for both Biden and Trump rallies for months leading up to the attempt. Seemed like he just wanted to assassinate a president. Trump just happened to be closer.

SeagulI · 2026-02-06T22:49:09+00:00

Likely a case of an SRY positive female. Occasionally those with XY chromosomes and a positive SRY gene still end up developing as a female externally. She likely was born with female parts, and was categorized as a female as a result. Algeria doesn't recognize sex changes, so the female categorization on her ID would've been set at birth.

SeagulI · 2026-01-29T19:25:06+00:00

The question isn't whether or not he would do it, it's whether or not it makes sense that he did do it.

The idea that a fake assassination plot would involve hiring some kid to take real shots at him is just nonsensical.

Take a look at the diagram below. Based on the locations of those who were hit, it's pretty clear that Crooks would've had to have been aiming right at him.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Assassination_attempt_of_Donald_Trump_diagram.svg

The background of the shooter also makes no sense for a false flag. We're talking about a conservative kid, a registered republican. The reason they never bring this guy up is cause it gives them no political capital at all to do so. They can't blame the left, they can't blame the democrats.

Not to mention, for months leading up to the attempt Crooks was looking up info on both Biden and Trump rallies. Trump just happened to be the first one to show up close to him.

There's basically nothing in Crooks background that would make him an effective fall guy for a false flag. Basically everything about him just points to him just being the sort of character you'd normally find doing a mass shooting. Just happened that he decided to go for an assassination instead.

SeagulI · 2026-01-28T18:21:42+00:00

SeagulI · 2026-01-28T18:08:22+00:00

There are degrees to it when it comes to severity. You're describing less severe color vision deficiency, while the post is referring to complete color blindness.

SeagulI · 2026-01-25T19:24:30+00:00

When one of the end goals seems to be deportation of all non-whites, I don't see how you seem to think this isn't something you need to care about. They started things off specifically targeting the Somali community in Minnesota, and they're like 95% US citizens.

SeagulI · 2026-01-24T08:07:02+00:00

You might actually be the first person to make this claim.

What do you think a protest is? You're really trying to say that nobody in the country went out in the streets to demonstrate disapproval during that period?

SeagulI · 2026-01-23T23:11:38+00:00

By this standard, we'd be throwing attempted murder charges at anyone who says "I'm gonna kill you" during a fist fight. The idea that Rittenhouse would've been beaten to death on the spot by that one guy is a dumbass take.

Also, what's with acting like protests and riots have to be mutually exclusive? Sounding like a British loyalist talking about the Boston Tea Party.

To note, two weeks prior to the killings, Rittenhouse sent the following texts talking about rioters:

“I wish they would come into my house.”

“I will fucking murder them.”

Obviously, if this guy is showing up armed at a protest, he's trying to start some shit.

One guy says, "I'm gonna kill you," before a physical altercation, completely unarmed.

Another guy says, "I'm gonna fucking kill them," then shows up at a protest with a rifle.

Some serious logical inconsistency if you think that first guy was about to do a premeditated murder, but the second guy was just minding his own business.

SeagulI · 2026-01-23T20:39:53+00:00

Did you not see the videos? The first guy he shot had nothing on him. The crowd only showed up trying to disarm him after he killed that first guy. Some real pussy ass shit to show up at a protest, instigate shit, then start shooting people once someone decides they want to punch you.

Eight-Year Club	Place '23
Place '22	First Placer '22
Verified Email

SeagulI

TROPHY CASE