4

10 comments

[–] Sarcastaway 3 points (+3|-0)

Boooooo. Anyone that cares enough to translate the source document will find:

The following figures refer to the nationwide police-registered crimes without alien-law violations.

The proportion of non-German suspects in all suspects is - as in the previous year - about 30 percent

Might be worth mentioning that the rates of sexual assault are up a significant amount. You'll have to download the actual PKS 2017 and manually translate to get that info though, since they've conveniently left it off the in-browser abbreviated report. The picture gets even worse when sorted for region.

[–] [Deleted] 0 points (+0|-0) Edited

If you read the German police source linked below by @InnocentBystander you will find that absolute crime figures are, in fact, down. Not "way up" as Trump says.

So whether you include crimes by foreign nationals or not, Trump is still wrong.

As in the previous year, about 30% of all suspects were not German nationals; the absolute number fell from 616,230 in 2016 to 599,357 in 2017. Of this number, 27.9% were asylum applicants, beneficiaries of national or international protection, persons granted asylum status, persons whose deportation has been temporarily suspended, refugees admitted under humanitarian relief programmes or foreigners residing in Germany illegally. This group accounts for 8.5% of all suspects (2016: 8.6%).

Edit : Grammer

[–] Sarcastaway 0 points (+0|-0)

I agree. I'm not defending Trump, he's simply wrong on this one, but the Vox article uses semantics to refute a claim that wasn't made.

When Trump (incorrectly) says migrant crime is up (one might also specifiy "Berlin" and "violent" as qualifiers). Vox replies net crime is at an near-record low. Neither are talking about the same thing. Trump is outright incorrect, and Vox (instead of focusing on the actual topic) decides to write one sentence saying "he's wrong" and follow it up with two paragraphs of tangential factoids about how the minister of the interior did his job(?) by releasing stats that don't confirm his beliefs, or the popular theories about why Merkel is losing support within her party.

I guess it says a lot about the state of the world, but I actually expect more from journalists than I do from a president shitposting on twitter.

Just to show that I'm not just taking a partisan stance on this, here's a damn good story that Vox could have published:

"Trump tweets flimsy facts: here's why we should be cautious where we get our news" The bullet points: Trump sometimes gets his facts wrong, and twitter provides a platform that stifles rebuke. As with other world leaders, Trump uses half-truths and lies to serve his own political interests, but never before has the media been so complicit, and gained such notoriety as a result. What's more dangerous, a president that lies, or a system of media where lies can't be addressed?

And boom, just like that you'd have some journalism.

If you follow the trail, all the articles with the "lowest since 92" tagline seem to cite this Politico article
It's interesting how all the headlines are similar and all the articles sound the same, and cite only this as a source.

The actual source of the quote and crime statistics is the German government.
So why not cite it?

It does show that overall crime is down a little.
I am pretty sure Trump was alluding to immigrant crime, and the statistics don't dispute that. Weapons and sex crimes are up.

The full Trump quote:

The people of Germany are turning against their leadership as migration is rocking the already tenuous Berlin coalition. Crime in Germany is way up. Big mistake made all over Europe in allowing millions of people in who have so strongly and violently changed their culture!

VOX is cancer, but so is most large media.

[–] [Deleted] 0 points (+2|-2)

If you can't spot the bullshit... you're probably falling for it...

[–] ScorpioGlitch 4 points (+4|-0)

A quick internet search shows that this lowest crime rate was published in late April, early May. There's been a notable number of times that Trump has tweeted something that was the opposite of what everyone was saying yet was proven correct. If he's saying it, he's saying it either because he thinks it's untrue (a jab at police or news) OR he's trying to get a very specific reaction from someone. Either way, he's leading the news folks around by the nose. Yet again. And they never stop falling for it. It's free publicity for Trump and he gets a message out to cause something to happen.

100% if the news folks would stop covering Trump, he'd lose like 75% of the influence he has.