Search This Blog

Saturday, October 5, 2024

FBI Entraps Another Fake Assassin

 

Editor's Note

The day before Thomas Matthew Crooks sprayed gunfire at President Trump, the Federal Bureau of Investigations arrested Asif Merchant, a Pakistani national who was admitted into the U.S. via parole for “significant public benefit.” The Dallas office of the FBI sponsored Merchant’s parole for the purposes of “security interests.”

The mainstream media has framed this arrest as an Iranian plot gone awry. Lee Smith investigates Merchant’s connection to Iran and analyzes a dangerous habit at the FBI.

Two attempts on the life of a former president, less than two months apart, is unprecedented in American history. And yet it’s not entirely surprising given that the country’s most powerful institutions and industries have spent the last eight years weaponizing the most suggestible and mentally ill of our citizenry to target Donald Trump and his supporters. Now it seems the FBI may be recruiting from abroad as well. 

According to the Trump campaign, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence recently briefed the Republican candidate on “real and specific threats from Iran to assassinate him in an effort to destabilize and sow chaos in the United States.” The Secret Service was alerted to the threat before the July 13 attempt on Trump’s life and reportedly increased his security because of it. But that was not enough to stop Thomas Matthew Crooks from shooting Trump in the face, killing Corey Comperatore, and wounding two other attendees.  

There’s little doubt the Iranians are targeting Trump, say former intelligence officials with whom I spoke. “The Iranians are promiscuous assassins, and they hate Trump more than anyone else on earth,” says Peter Theroux, a retired CIA officer who worked on Iran and related issues during his tenure at Langley. “Trump enforced sanctions against Iran. He moved the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem. He was the most antithetical to everything Tehran wants, including the triumphal visit to Riyadh he made for his first presidential trip in 2017.” 

But above all, there’s the fact Trump ordered the January 2020 assassination of Qasem Soleimani, onetime chief of the Quds Force, the external operations unit of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC), and second in command only to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. The Iranians have vowed to avenge the terror master’s death and have threatened not only the former president but also former Trump administration officials, including Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Iran envoy Brian Hook, National Security Advisor John Bolton, and his successor Robert O’Brien. In August 2022, the Justice Department charged an IRGC officer for plotting to kill Bolton. 

The Islamic Republic definitely has it out for Trump, but it seems this most recent Iranian plot to kill the Republican candidate was hatched by the FBI. 

Last month the DOJ announced it had charged a Pakistani national with ties to Iran in connection to a plot to assassinate a politician or U.S. government official on U.S. soil. According to reports, Trump was the target.

The suspect, Asif Merchant, entered the country in April and was arrested on July 12 as he prepared to leave the country. It appears that Merchant was the Iranian threat the Secret Service was briefed on before the July 13 rally in Butler, PA.

The FBI arranged his entry into the U.S. According to an August Twitter post from Fox correspondent Bill Melugin, Merchant “was admitted into the U.S. via parole for ‘significant public benefit’ when [Customs and Border Patrol] encountered him at the airport in [Texas] in April after he flew in from overseas.” The sponsor of his parole, Melugin reported, “was the FBI’s Dallas office, for ‘security interests.’”

Melugin’s sources told him the FBI had intelligence on Merchant “before he arrived in the U.S. and needed him to physically come into the country to develop the case on him and arrest him, and that if they had arrested him at Customs, they would not have been able to gather evidence and information about his plot.”

But to date there’s little evidence the FBI developed a case based on intelligence collected before Merchant’s entry. Rather, it seems more likely that federal law enforcement imported a terrorist entrapment target for the purpose of fabricating a plot. Former FBI agent turned whistleblower Steve Friend says the Bureau’s playbook is simple: “Identify a vulnerable person. Establish fake friendships with undercover agents and informants. Encourage him to agree to commit a terrorist act he is otherwise incapable of committing. Arrest him.”

Friend says that if the FBI really had probable cause for an arrest, it would make sense to facilitate Merchant’s travel rather than going through a lengthy and possibly contentious extradition process. But what’s curious, he says, “is that he was in the country for several months before they executed the arrest.”

If the FBI had intelligence on Merchant’s plan to kill Trump before he arrived in the United States, there’s no evidence of it in the affidavit for his arrest. “It was all information about his actions while in the United States,” says Friend. “That doesn’t mean that he hadn’t done anything before then. But it confirms that they didn’t have enough to arrest him when he arrived here.”

Neither the affidavit nor the indictment make a strong case that Merchant is an experienced operative. The “use of coded language, use of multiple cellular telephones, and removal of cellular telephones to attempt to avoid surveillance” cited in the affidavit do not, contrary to the arresting agent’s contention, exemplify expert “tradecraft and operational security measures.” “It’s laughable,” says Friend. “Like complex tradecraft is telling an accomplice to put his phone in a box? A corner drug dealer’s tradecraft is more sophisticated than that.”

Nor is there any evidence of Merchant’s ties to the Iranian regime. In the affidavit, the arresting agent cites his experience working on investigations related to Iran and the Quds Force, but all that connects Merchant to Iran is the fact he has a wife and family there as well as another wife and family in Pakistan. He traveled to Iran before coming to the U.S., but there’s no indication of what he did there, who he met with, how the plot originated, or on whose behalf it was to be executed.

In fact, according to the affidavit, Merchant told undercover agents that the “people who will be targeted are the ones who are hurting Pakistan and the world, [the] Muslim world.” The FBI resolves this major discrepancy by explaining it away. “In my training and experience,” the arresting agent states in the affidavit, “individuals engaged in plots originating overseas to commit acts of violence in the United States often obscure the sponsor or broader purpose of the plot.”

But that’s not what DOJ records documenting previous Iranian plots show. For instance, DOJ’s 2022 filings regarding the arrest of Iranian national Shahram Poursafi for plotting to kill Bolton specifically identify the suspect as a member of the IRGC. DOJ documents concerning the 2011 arrest of Manssor Arbabsiar for conspiring to kill Saudi Arabia’s ambassador to the U.S. show that Arbabsiar confessed that he met with Quds Force officials who recruited, funded, and directed him to blow up a Washington, D.C. restaurant where the Saudi ambassador regularly ate. There’s nothing in the Merchant filings tying him to official Iranian channels.

There are other signs that there’s something not quite right about the Merchant plot. Arbabsiar was ready to pay $1.5 million for killing the Saudi ambassador. Poursafi put a $300,000 bounty on Bolton’s head and said he had an additional job for which he’d pay $1 million, presumably to kill Trump. But Merchant offered only $5,000 to kill Trump. And he didn’t even have the money. He had to travel from New York to Boston to make arrangements to have $5,000 sent from a foreign country, which, according to the affidavit, was likely Pakistan.

But perhaps the most bizarre detail is Merchant’s assertion that the assassination was to be only the first in an ongoing series of high-profile crimes. How, after killing the former and likely future president in broad daylight, did Merchant expect to evade law enforcement authorities long enough to embark on a sustained crime spree targeting heavily guarded politicians and officials?

Historically, the Iranians don’t send their best when targeting their enemies abroad. Arbabsiar, for instance, reportedly suffered from bipolar disorder and was known for being disorganized. But Merchant stands apart. From the court filings alone, it’s plain that he’s delusional. It seems pretty obvious that the so-called Iran plot, or at least the Merchant component of it, is an FBI fabrication.

Why would the FBI invent a plot to kill Trump? First, by claiming the Iranians are responsible for this effort deflects attention from the fact that the real two would-be assassins, Crooks and Ryan Routh, are Democratic Party supporters. Further, says Friend, it boosts FBI statistics. “If they had just been aware of some sort of a plot and brought it to light then it would have been a disruption of a domestic terrorist plot. But because they arrested him, it’s dismantlement, which is a very rare and very valuable statistic.”

Disruption interferes with an organization’s ability to function, like arresting a member of a drug gang. It disrupts the gang in a way that is going to impede them. But dismantlement, says Friend, “means taking down the entire organization. With the Merchant plot, the FBI can argue that he was forming an organization and now [they’ve] dismantled it — even though he was able to create it only because [they] facilitated his entry.” And because the other members of the plot are informants or undercover officers.

The Merchant plot is reminiscent of the alleged Gretchen Whitmer kidnapping and murder plot in 2020. Court proceedings showed that the entire scheme was cooked up by federal law enforcement officers and informants.

The danger with these kind of entrapment schemes, Friend explains, isn’t that someone as obviously incompetent as Merchant was going to kill Trump, but that, as a mentally unstable target committed to righting perceived wrongs against the Muslim world, he might have selected easier targets.

“This is a low intelligence person that they were able to cultivate here,” says Friend. “What if he just at one point had a moment of clarity and said, ‘Hey, this is a huge lift? I don’t have the logistics. I don’t have the financing. Why don’t I just grab a giant knife and stab an infidel?’ But that’s not something the FBI ever takes into consideration because they don’t think about the people they’re supposed to be protecting.”

The FBI’s problem isn’t just that it’s fudging statistics to boost its budget and win accolades, raises, and promotions all around for “solving” a high-profile case. The much bigger issue is timing. After all, Merchant was arrested a day before the first attempt on Trump’s life in Butler. There’s no evidence that the Secret Service’s failures that afternoon can be attributed to anything but incompetence. But the fact that the FBI is importing foreigners and encouraging them to plot against Trump raises questions that both the Secret Service and FBI would prefer to ignore.

Typically, the Bureau hides facts by claiming they are part of an active investigation and can’t be divulged to the public. This time, FBI Director Christopher Wray, notoriously stingy with facts he is bound to share with the American public, must come clean.

Lee Smith is a bestselling author whose new book, Disappearing the President: Trump, Truth Social, and the Fight for the Republic, will be published on October 22.

https://tomklingenstein.com/the-fbi-entraps-another/

Hims & Hers Health Set to Join S&P SmallCap 600

 Hims & Hers Health, Inc. (NYSE:HIMS) will replace Vector Group Ltd (NYSE:VGR) in the S&P SmallCap 600 effective prior to the opening of trading on Wednesday, October 9. JT Group is acquiring Vector Group in a deal expected to close soon pending final conditions.

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/hims--hers-health-set-to-join-sp-smallcap-600-302268069.html

Iran's Oil Tankers Flee Biggest Export Terminal Fearing Israeli Attack

 By Charles Kennedy of OilPrice.com

Iranian oil tankers have moved away from Kharg Island, Iran’s biggest oil export terminal, amid fears of an imminent Israeli attack on the most important crude export infrastructure in Iran.

Satellite images and tanker tracking companies have detected the major exodus of Iranian tankers away from Kharg Island, which handles about 90% of Iran’s all oil exports, CNBC reports.

“The National Iranian Tanker Company (NITC) appears to be fearing an imminent attack by Israel,” TankerTrackers.com posted on social media platform X late on Thursday.

“Their empty VLCC supertankers vacated the country's largest oil terminal, Kharg Island, yesterday,” TankerTrackers.com said.

The vessel-tracking service noted that “crude oil loadings continue, but all of the extra vacant shipping capacity has been removed from the anchorage of Kharg Island.”

“This is the first time we see anything like this since the 2018 sanctions round,” TankerTrackers.com said.

Satellite imagery captured two weeks ago by the European Space Agency’s Copernicus Sentinel-1 mission showed a number of very large crude carriers in the waters around Kharg Island, CNBC says.

But satellite images of the same area from October 3 showed that no tankers can be seen around Iran’s most important oil export terminal, according to CNBC.

The removal of vacant shipping capacity from Kharg Island suggests that Iran could be bracing for an Israeli attack on its oil infrastructure.

The oil market is also awaiting the Israeli response to the Iranian missile attack on Israel earlier this week. Oil prices were up by 1.5% early on Friday and on track for a strong weekly gain amid reignited tensions in the Middle East.

Most analysts say that the OPEC spare capacity, concentrated in Saudi Arabia and the UAE, would be enough to compensate for an Iranian loss of supply.

An even more significant disruption to supply from the Middle East could lead to triple-digit oil prices. But analysts currently believe attacks on oil infrastructure in other producers in the region or the closure of the Strait of Hormuz are low-probability events.

Nasrallah's possible successor out of contact since Friday, Lebanese source says

 The potential successor to slain Hezbollah leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah has been out of contact since Friday, a Lebanese security source said on Saturday, after an Israeli airstrike that is reported to have targeted him.

In its campaign against the Iran-backed Lebanese group, Israel carried out a large strike on Beirut's southern suburbs late on Thursday that Axios cited three Israeli officials as saying targeted Hashem Safieddine in an underground bunker.

The Lebanese security source and two other Lebanese security sources said that ongoing Israeli strikes on Beirut's southern suburb - known as Dahiyeh - since Friday have kept rescue workers from scouring the site of the attack.

Hezbollah has made no comment so far on Safieddine since the attack.

Israeli Lieutenant Colonel Nadav Shoshani said on Friday the military was still assessing the Thursday night airstrikes, which he said targeted Hezbollah's intelligence headquarters.

The loss of Nasrallah's rumoured successor would be yet another blow to Hezbollah and its patron Iran. Israeli strikes across the region in the past year, sharply accelerated in the past few weeks, have decimated Hezbollah's leadership.

Israel expanded its conflict in Lebanon on Saturday with its first strike in the northern city of Tripoli, a Lebanese security official said, after more bombs hit Beirut suburbs and Israeli troops launched raids in the south.

Israel has begun an intense bombing campaign in Lebanon and sent troops across the border in recent weeks after nearly a year of exchanging fire with Hezbollah. Fighting had previously been mostly limited to the Israel-Lebanon border area, taking place in parallel to Israel's year-old war in Gaza against Palestinian group Hamas.

Israel says it aims to allow the safe return of tens of thousands of citizens to their homes in northern Israel, bombarded by Hezbollah since Oct.8 last year.

The Israeli attacks have eliminated much of Hezbollah's senior military leadership, including Secretary General Nasrallah in an air attack on Sept. 27.

The Israeli assault has also killed hundreds of ordinary Lebanese, including rescue workers, Lebanese officials say, and forced 1.2 million people - almost a quarter of the population - to flee their homes.

The Lebanese security official told Reuters that Saturday's strike on a Palestinian refugee camp in Tripoli killed a member of Hamas, his wife and two children. Media affiliated with the Palestinian group also said the strike killed a leader of its armed wing.

The Israeli military did not immediately comment on the strike on Tripoli, a Sunni Muslim-majority port city that its warplanes also targeted during a 2006 war with Hezbollah.

Israel has meanwhile staged nightly bombardment of Dahiyeh, once a bustling and densely populated area of Beirut and a stronghold for Hezbollah.

On Saturday, smoke billowed over Dahiyeh, large parts of which have been reduced to rubble sending residents fleeing to other parts of Beirut or of Lebanon.

In northern Israel, air raid sirens sent people running for their shelters amid rocket fire from Lebanon.

ISRAEL WEIGHS OPTIONS FOR IRAN

The violence comes as the anniversary approaches of Hamas' attack on southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, which killed 1,200 people and in which about 250 were taken as hostages, according to Israeli tallies.

Israel's subsequent assault on Gaza has killed nearly 42,000 Palestinians, according to Gaza's health ministry, and displaced nearly all of the enclave's population of 2.3 million.

Iran, which backs both Hezbollah and Hamas, and which has lost key commanders of its elite Revolutionary Guards Corps to Israeli air strikes in Syria this year, launched a salvo of ballistic missiles at Israel on Tuesday. The strikes did little damage.

Israel has been weighing options in its response to Iran's attack.

Oil prices have risen on the possibility of an attack on Iran's oil facilities as Israel pursues its goals of pushing back Hezbollah militants in Lebanon and eliminating their Hamas allies in Gaza.

U.S. President Joe Biden on Friday urged Israel to consider alternatives to striking Iranian oil fields, adding that he thinks Israel has not yet concluded how to respond to Iran.

Israeli news website Ynet reported that the top U.S. general for the Middle East, Army General Michael Kurilla, is headed for Israel in the coming day. Israeli and U.S. officials were not immediately reachable for comment.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/hamas-armed-wing-leader-killed-024559207.html

Will The Supreme Court Decide That Religious Charter Schools Are Unconstitutional?

 by William Jeynes via RealClearEducation,

Recently, I was on a 3-person panel discussion and debate at Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government. We were asked to address the question of whether religious charter schools are constitutional. We also shared how we thought the U.S. Supreme Court would rule. This issue has risen to the forefront of educational debate largely because of the U.S. Supreme Court Carson v. Makin (2022) case and an effort in Oklahoma to found a religious charter school, St. Isadore of Seville Catholic Virtual School

In 2023-2024. However, one should note that these developments did not launch the momentum to rule in favor of religious charter schools, but they built on earlier debates and statements from prior cases including Justice Stephen Breyer’s question in the Espinosa vs. Montana Department of Revenue (2020) case, asking about religious charter schools. Bill Clinton’s speech in 1995 in Vienna, Virginia stating that past U.S. Supreme Court decisions regarding faith were misinterpreted has also played an important role in the debate on religious charter schools.

The Carson v. Makin (2022) case, based in Maine, played a major role in increasing the momentum for religious charter schools. In that case, the state of Maine had provided vouchers for a good number of parents who desired to send their children to non-religious private schools. In contrast, however, Maine’s government did not provide these vouchers for parents who wished to send their children to religious private schools. In a decision penned by Chief Justice Roberts, the U.S. Supreme Court voted 6-3 that the Maine voucher program was unconstitutional because it discriminated against faith-based schools.

As important as the Carson v. Makin (2022) case is, there remain three issues that the U.S. Supreme Court needs to address in any decision on the constitutionality of religious charter schools. First, are religious charter schools constitutional? Second, to what degree may state governments impose restrictions on religious private schools that may inhibit their religious freedoms or beliefs? For example, Adam Frey, the Attorney General of Maine, clarified the state of Maine’s policy following the Carson v. Makin (2022) decision. Frey declared that in order for any private school to participate in the voucher program, it had to agree to follow Maine’s Human Rights Act. The question that the U.S. Supreme Court needs to answer is to what extent states may initiate such actions. How far is it legally permissible for them to go? Where does one draw the line?

The third issue that the U.S. Supreme Court must address is that it needs to determine whether those who run charter schools are state or private actors. This is because the vast majority of people who run charter schools are private groups. However, these charters are defined by law as public schools and are supported by tax-payer dollars. If the Court rules that those who operate the charter schools are state actors, then because they must be non-sectarian, religious charter schools will be ruled unconstitutional. However, if the Court rules that charter schools are private actors, then religious charter schools will be ruled constitutional.

The problem is that determining whether those who run charter schools are state or private actors will not be easy. This is because the courts have often disagreed with each other in their conclusions. For example, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in 2010 (in Caviness v. Horizon Community Learning Center), determined that charter schools were private actors when it came to firing educators. That is, no state hearings were necessary. The case is likely particularly salient, because it cited a U.S. Supreme Court case, Rendell-Baker v. Kohn (1982)This case involved a private school that was very similar to a charter school. It was created to help kids really struggling in school and received about 90% of its funding from the government. The U.S. Supreme Court also found the school to be a private actor in the case of an employee being fired. The Court might view the Rendell-Baker v. Kohn (1982) case as the pivotal one in terms of helping establish precedent for its eventual decisions on religious charter schools, in part because it is a U.S. Supreme Court case. However, in a 2022 Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals case (Peltier v. Charter Day School), regarding school dress codes, the ruling was that those who ran charter schools were state actors.

Whether the Court will utilize the St. Isadore of Seville Catholic Virtual School case to address these issues or wait for a future case remains to be seen. Nevertheless, given that Carson v. Makin (2022) and Justice Breyer’s 2020 statement have brought this issue to the forefront, one can foresee a scenario in which one may not have to wait long.

During the panel discussion, I opined that the U.S. Supreme Court will likely eventually rule that religious charter schools are constitutional. I did not give a precise timeline regarding when such a ruling might take place. Nevertheless, the other two academics on the panel agreed with my prediction, one of whom was a well-seasoned Harvard law professor.

Almost as salient as the issue of whether religious charter schools are constitutional is the context the U.S. Supreme Court establishes in their decision. The U.S. Supreme Court will either provide a narrow context for its decision or a broader one. An example of a narrow context would be declaring that religious charter schools are constitutional, but the Court will leave it up to the states to determine the degree of implementation. An example of a broader context would be if the U.S. Supreme Court decides that if a state has charter schools, it must at least offer the possibility of having religious charter schools.

Whatever the Court decides, it will have a substantial long-term impact on schools and society. If the court decides that religious charter schools are constitutional, one result is that will like give families more options in terms of choosing schools for their children. According to David Tyack in his book, The One Best System, the American system of schooling is far too monolithic and the historical trend toward increased centralization is not consistent with the nation’s diversity. In the next several years the nation will discover whether the U.S. Supreme Court agrees.

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/will-supreme-court-decide-religious-charter-schools-are-unconstitutional

Larry Summers says Fed’s big rate cut was a ‘mistake’ after hot jobs report

 Former US Treasury Secretary Larry Summers says September’s better-than-expected jobs report shows the Federal Reserve’s half-point rate cut was “a mistake.”

Following the Labor Department’s report that employers added 254,000 jobs in September – well above the 140,000 gain that was predicted by LSEG economists – and the unemployment rate declined slightly from a month ago to 4.1%, Summers took to social media to weigh in on the central bank’s actions.

“Today’s employment report confirms suspicions that we are in a high neutral rate environment where responsible monetary policy requires caution in rate cutting,” the famed economist wrote. “With the benefit of hindsight, the 50 basis point cut in September was a mistake, though not one of great consequence.”

“With this data, ‘no landing’ as well as ‘hard landing’ is a risk the @federalreserve has to reckon with,” he continued. “Nominal wage growth remains well above pre-COVID levels and it does not appear to be decelerating.”

Analysts at The Kobeissi Letter noted that the latest jobs report beat expectations for the first time since May, and posed the question of whether the central bank’s 50-basis point cut was too aggressive.

According to the outlet, markets saw nearly a 50% chance of a 50-basis point cut next month ahead of the latest jobs report, but after the jobs report, the odds of a 25-basis point interest cut in November surged to 93%.

Larry Summers
Former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers said September’s better-than-expected jobs report shows the Federal Reserve’s half-point rate cut was “a mistake.”Boston Globe via Getty Images
Fed Chair Jerome Powell
Jerome Powell’s Fed cut interest rates by a half-percentage point last month.REUTERS

Labor attorney Eric Beane, a partner at Foundation Law Group, told FOX Business that he disagrees that the 50-point cut was a mistake, because the reason for the higher cut was to deal with the slowing in the labor market and an increase in unemployment filings.

“The hope is that, now that inflation is under control, we want to deal with the other side of the Fed mandate and make sure that we’re not tanking employment,” Beane said,” adding, “I think further cuts – probably more measured than a half-point – are what’s going to be necessary to prevent there being a significant decline in employment moving forward.”

https://nypost.com/2024/10/04/business/fed-made-mistake-slashing-rates-by-half-a-point-larry-summers/

First jobs, now crime: Biden’s FBI revises 2022 violence stats for the worse

 This week President Biden once again took a victory lap on crime, trumpeting preliminary FBI data on trends in 2024.

“Communities across our country are safer now than when I took office,” he bragged in an official statement.

Yet, with crime a central issue in this year’s election, he and the mainstream media have carefully ignored evidence that the FBI may be fudging its numbers — much like the way the Bureau of Labor Statistics massively overestimated the number of jobs created during the Biden-Harris administration.

Last month, new FBI data showed that reported serious violent crime (murder, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault) fell by 3.5% in 2023. 

But at the same time — and much more quietly — the FBI revised its earlier data for 2022, turning a reported decrease into a worrisome increase in violent crime.

Last year, the media trumpeted the FBI’s claim that reported violent crime had fallen in 2022 by 2.1%. 

But now the FBI admits that violent crime rose in 2022 instead, by 4.5% — off by 6.6 percentage points.

These updated numbers resulted in a net increase in 2022 over 2021 of 80,029 violent crimes: 1,699 murders, 7,780 rapes, 33,459 robberies and 37,091 aggravated assaults.

It’s a concerning change regarding a highly politicized topic. A Gallup poll found in March that “crime and violence” was Americans’ second biggest concern, after inflation. 

For a couple of years now, the mainstream media has been running headlines such as this from NBC News: “Most people think the U.S. crime rate is rising. They’re wrong.” 

USA Today’s take on the 2023 FBI crime data was typical: “Violent crime dropped for second straight year in 2023, including murder and rape.”

Yet don’t expect the media to let people know that all the headlines over the last year were wrong — or that 2022’s increase was greater than the reported 2023 drop.

Perhaps the FBI’s newest numbers won’t be revised upward next year, after the election has safely passed. 

But even if we take them at face value, it’s important to distinguish reported crime from total crime. 

We have known for decades that most crimes aren’t reported to the police. That’s why the US Department of Justice provides a measure of total crime, which includes both reported and unreported crime. 

And the results of the Department of Justice’s Bureau of Justice Statistics 2023 National Crime Victimization Survey, released in mid-September, tell a very different story. 

Since victims don’t report most crimes, the NCVS interviews 240,000 people each year about their personal experiences. 

Instead of the FBI’s 3.5% drop in serious violent crime, the NCVS found a 4.1% increase in violent crime victimization from 2022 to 2023. 

While the FBI claims that serious violent crime has fallen by 5.8% since Biden took office, the NCVS numbers show that total violent crime has risen by an incredible 55.4%. Rapes were up by 42%, robbery by 63%, and aggravated assault by 55% during his term. 

The increases shown by the NCVS during the Biden-Harris administration are by far the largest percentage increases over any other three-year period, more than doubling the previous record.

If we compare 2023 rates with 2019’s pre-COVID violent crime rates, the FBI’s new data show virtually no improvement — just a 0.2% drop — while the NCVS shows a 19% increase in that time period.

Much has been made of the recent decline in murder rates. But while murder rates fell by 16.2% from 2020 to 2023, they still exceed pre-COVID levels by a significant 9.6%.

The mainstream media’s treatment of these statistics has been shameful.

Even after the NCVS data was released and former President Donald Trump discussed them in a press conference, most outlets only noted the new numbers in “fact checks” that sought to dismiss their importance

The bottom line: Trump is correct that violent crime has increased significantly during the Biden-Harris administration.

He has also been correct to point out that many police departments no longer report their data to the FBI. 

In 2023, 21% of departments including large cities like New York and Los Angeles, sent no crime figures to the FBI. Another 24% of police departments only partially reported crime data in 2022, the last year available.

The mainstream media refuses to mention any data that doesn’t fit their narrative. 

But Americans in many parts of the country see the effects of rising crime every day, from locked-up products in the local Walgreens to constant news about assaults in the subway. 

We know that our lives were not like this a few years ago.

John R. Lott Jr. is president of the Crime Prevention Research Center. He served as senior adviser for research and statistics in the Office of Justice Programs and the Office of Legal Policy at the Justice Department.

https://nypost.com/2024/10/03/opinion/bidens-fbi-quietly-revises-2022-crime-stats-for-the-worse/