Skip to content
Election Overtime Project
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories
The Pentagon

Project 2025: The Department of Defense

Meat case at the grocery store

Soaring grocery prices are not acts of God

Ducks

The 12 worst House districts: Experts label gerrymandering's dirty dozen

Has President Joe Biden ‘let in’ nearly 1,700 people with links to terrorism?

Sen. Ron Johnson in front of a chart

Sen. Ron Johnson claims President Biden has allowed 1,700 terrorists to enter the country. That total refers to encounters (people who were stopped)

Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images
Tom Kertscher, Wisconsin Watch
By Tom Kertscher, Wisconsin WatchJun 20, 2024
Tom Kertscher, Wisconsin Watch
See More Writings by author

This fact brief was originally published by Wisconsin Watch. Read the original here. Fact briefs are published by newsrooms in the Gigafact network, and republished by The Fulcrum. Visit Gigafact to learn more.

Has President Joe Biden ‘let in’ nearly 1,700 people with links to terrorism?

No.

Border agents have encountered individuals on the federal terrorist watchlist nearly 1,700 times since President Joe Biden took office — that means those people were stopped while trying to enter the U.S.

The latest figures show 1,664 encounters from fiscal 2021, starting Oct. 30, 2020, through May 15, 2024. That includes nearly three months before Biden was inaugurated.

The watchlist contains known or suspected terrorists and individuals “who represent a potential threat.”

About 78 percent of the encounters were at legal ports, where entry into the U.S. can be denied. The other 367 encounters occurred between legal ports, nearly all at the Southwest border. Those individuals may be detained and removed.

The 1,700 claim was made June 4 by Fox Business TV host Elizabeth MacDonald while interviewing U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.).

A Fox spokesperson provided no evidence that any of the encounters resulted in entries.

This fact brief is responsive to conversations such as this one.

Sources

Associated Press Posts misrepresent border encounters with people on terror watchlist

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

Google Docs Terrorist Screening Data Set Encounters as of June 5, 2024

US Customs and Border Protection CBP Enforcement Statistics

Fox Business Sen. Ron Johnson: Biden's border executive action 'proves point' he's had authority to keep the border closed

Latest news

Ronald Reagan
Election 2024

Project 2025: ‘Onward’? More like backwards.

Read More

Teenage girls lying on bed looking at smart phones
The Good Brigade/Getty Images

Instagram teen accounts: Just one front in the fight for mental health

Guillermo is the CEO of Ignite, a political leadership program for young women.

It’s good news that Instagram has launched stricter controls for teen accounts, strengthening privacy settings for those under 18. Underage users’ accounts are now automatically set to private mode. The platform is also implementing tighter restrictions on the type of content teens can browse and blocking material deemed sensitive, such as posts related to cosmetic procedures or eating disorders.

Keep ReadingShow less
Young man looking angry at display of his smartphone.

The inflammatory rhetoric, meaningless speculation and lack of fact checking by the media may result in young adults rejecting traditional platforms in favor of their well-being.

urbazon/Getty Images

By focusing on outrage, the media risks alienating younger audiences

Rikleen is executive director of Lawyers Defending American Democracy and the editor of “Her Honor – Stories of Challenge and Triumph from Women Judges.” Beougher is a junior at Amherst College and a co-founder ofStudents Strengthening American Democracy.

As attacks on democracy and the rule of law continually increase, much of the media refuses to address its role in intensifying the peril.

Instead of asking hard questions and insisting on answers, traditional media outlets increasingly trade news and facts for speculative commentary that ignores a story’s contextual significance. At the same time, social media outlets and influencers stoke anger as an alternative to thoughtfulness.

Keep ReadingShow less
Bookstore
www.avidbookshop.com

Athens, GA., bookstore battles bans by stocking shelves

News Ambassadors is working to narrow the partisan divide through a collaborative journalism project to help American communities that hold different political views better understand each other, while giving student reporters a valuable learning experience in the creation of solutions reporting.

A program of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund, News Ambassadors is directed by Shia Levitt, a longtime public radio journalist who has reported for NPR, Marketplace and other outlets. Levitt has also taught radio reporting and audio storytelling at Brooklyn College in New York and at Mills College in Oakland, Calif., as well as for WNYC’s Radio Rookies program and other organizations.

Keep ReadingShow less
Woman looking off into the distance while holding her mobile phone

Seeing a lie or error corrected can make some people more skeptical of the fact-checker.

FG Trade/Getty Inages

Readers trust journalists less when they debunk rather than confirm claims

Stein is an associate professor of marketing at California State Polytechnic University, Pomona. Meyersohn is pursuing an Ed.S. in school psychology California State University, Long Beach.

Pointing out that someone else is wrong is a part of life. And journalists need to do this all the time – their job includes helping sort what’s true from what’s not. But what if people just don’t like hearing corrections?

Our new research, published in the journal Communication Research, suggests that’s the case. In two studies, we found that people generally trust journalists when they confirm claims to be true but are more distrusting when journalists correct false claims.

Keep ReadingShow less
FCC seal on a smart phone
Pavlo Gonchar/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images

Project 2025: Another look at the Federal Communications Commission

Biffle is a podcast host and contributor at BillTrack50.

This is part of a series offering a nonpartisan counter to Project 2025, a conservative guideline to reforming government and policymaking during the first 180 days of a second Trump administration. The Fulcrum's cross partisan analysis of Project 2025 relies on unbiased critical thinking, reexamines outdated assumptions, and uses reason, scientific evidence, and data in analyzing and critiquing Project 2025.

Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation’s policy and personnel proposals for a second Trump administration, has four main goals when it comes to the Federal Communications Commission: reining in Big Tech, promoting national security, unleashing economic prosperity, and ensuring FCC accountability and good governance. Today, we’ll focus on the first of those agenda items.

Keep ReadingShow less
© Copyright 2024