Center for Immigration Studies

Trump's Dystopian TV Ad Cites Anti-Immigrant Group's Attack On DACA/DAPA

Donald Trump is out with his first TV ad of the general election, and it’s predictably despicable: an image of “Hillary Clinton’s America” being flooded with refugees and “illegal immigrants convicted of committing crimes” while “the system stays rigged against Americans.” The ad has drawn comparisons to the infamous anti-immigrant ad that California Gov. Pete Wilson ran in 1994 as he was trying to push through a ballot measure imposing draconian penalties on undocumented immigrants.

The ad, also unsurprisingly, cites the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), the group whose reports provide a constant stream of ammunition to anti-immigrant politicians despite its troubling roots in white nationalism and history of skewing the facts.

The CIS citation comes about 10 seconds into the ad, when the narrator warns that in Clinton’s America, “illegal immigrants convicted of committing crimes get to stay, collecting Social Security benefits, skipping the line.”

The ad’s citation appears to be referring to an April 14 CIS article on the implications of U.S. v. Texas, the Supreme Court case on President Obama’s DAPA and expanded DACA executive actions, which extended temporary deportation relief to some people brought to the country as children and some of their parents. This appears to be where the Trump campaign got the “collecting Social Security benefits” line, which it dishonestly links to its smear of “illegal immigrants convicted of committing crimes” (the DAPA and DACA programs bar people convicted of most crimes from eligibility). Those who receive eligibility to work under the programs do become eligible for Social Security, which they pay into like nearly every other American worker, under rules that existed long before President Obama took office.

It’s telling that the Trump campaign is getting its arguments about immigration policy from CIS. The group is one of a large network of anti-immigrant organizations started by John Tanton, an activist with white nationalist leanings and a troublingly extreme “population control” agenda including such things as supporting China’s brutal one-child policy.

CIS itself is more conservative in its rhetoric than its founder—allowing it to gain a foothold among members of Congress and others eager for research supporting an anti-immigrant agenda—but the agenda it promotes is one that demonizes immigrants.

As we noted in a recent report on CIS and its fellow Tanton-linked organizations, CIS has been a proponent of the idea “that instead of embracing a moderate position on immigration in order to win back Latinos who favored George W. Bush, the GOP should put its energy and resources into expanding its popularity and increasing turnout among white voters, in part by scapegoating people of color”—a strategy that Trump’s campaign is putting to the test:

CIS spokespeople regularly make this argument, along with another one that has long been popular among white nationalists: that Latino immigrants will never vote Republican because they are inherently liberal. During the debate over the “Gang of Eight” bill, CIS Executive Director Mark Krikorian argued that the GOP shouldn’t bother trying to increase its share of the Latino vote because “generally speaking, Hispanic voters are Democrats, and so the idea of importing more of them as a solution to the Republican Party’s problems is kind of silly.” In another interview, Krikorian argued that immigration reform would “destroy the Republican Party” and ultimately “the republic.” The next year, he charged that Democrats were using immigration as “a way of importing voters” and to “create the conditions, such as increased poverty, increased lack of health insurance, that lead even non-immigrant voters to be more receptive to big government solutions.” At one point, Krikorian told Republicans that they should oppose immigration reform simply to deny President Obama a political victory.

Steven Camarota, the research director at CIS, has said that the current level of legal immigration “dooms” conservatives. Stephen Steinlight, a senior policy analyst at CIS, has said that immigration reform would lead to “the unmaking of America” by “destroying the Republican Party” and turning the U.S. into a “tyrannical and corrupt” one-party state. He explained that Latinos aren’t likely to vote Republican because they “don’t exemplify ‘strong family values,’” as illustrated by high rates of “illegitimacy.” More than a year before Donald Trump made national headlines by calling for a ban on all Muslim immigration, Steinlight said that he would like to ban Muslims from coming to the country because they “believe in things that are subversive to the Constitution.”

Steinlight summed up the argument in 2005, when he said that immigration threatens “the American people as a whole and the future of Western civilization.” More recently, Steinlight told a tea party group in 2014 that the “Gang of Eight” immigration reform bill amounted to “a plot against America ” because it would turn the U.S. into a Democrat-led “one-party state” where citizens would “lose our liberty” and “social cohesion.” Steinlight has happily fed into some of the more vitriolic tea party hatred of President Obama, saying that the president should not only be impeached for his handling of immigration, but that “ being hung, drawn and quartered is probably too good for him .” On another occasion, Steinlight said that he’d like to attack religious leaders who support immigration reform with “a baseball bat.”

Right Wing Round-Up - 6/14/16

Anti-Immigration Activist: Dems Want To Bring In Immigrants to Vote Illegally

Rosemary Jenks, the director of government relations at the anti-immigration group NumbersUSA, claimed yesterday that Democrats are pressing for immigration reform because they “look at all the people around the world” as “potential Democratic voters in the United States” and hope that immigrants will cast Democratic votes even before becoming citizens.

The Center for Security Policy’s Frank Gaffney interviewed Jenks on his “Secure Freedom Radio” program yesterday, asking her if immigration plans like Hillary Clinton’s would just serve as “a magnet” for “more immigration of an illegal kind.”

“There’s absolutely no question about that,” Jenks replied, “and we’ve seen that for the past eight years. This current administration, the Obama administration, is absolutely unwilling to stop anyone from entering the country illegally or to remove them once they do enter the country illegally. So we have this situation where essentially Democrats look at all the people around the world, the billions of them, as potential Democratic voters in the United States. So if they can get here, the Democrats will do whatever they can to make sure they can stay and eventually become citizens and vote — you know, well, whether or not they're citizens.”

“Yeah, maybe as soon as they can, not when they become citizens,” Gaffney replied.

“And it’s a huge problem with a general viewpoint,” Jenks continued, “if you look at folks from outside the country as Democratic voters, then your answer is ‘bring them all in,’ and that cannot be the answer for the survival of our country.”

Contrary to Jenks’ claims, undocumented immigrant population has actually dropped in recent years; likewise, immigrants’ rights advocates might object to her claim that Obama is “absolutely unwilling” to deport undocumented immigrants.

Jenks formerly worked at the Center for Immigration Studies, another anti-immigration group founded by activist John Tanton.

Trump's Anti-Immigrant Campaign Is Rooted In White Nationalist Sentiment

It shouldn’t be surprising that Donald Trump has refused to renounce support from the leader of the Ku Klux Klan, as the GOP presidential frontrunner has relied on the backing of white nationalists throughout his campaign.

A new report released today by People For the American Way observes that many of the leading anti-immigrant groups in the U.S. are rooted in white nationalism and fears about a “Latin onslaught,” as John Tanton, the founder of a network of Nativist groups, put it.

“These leading anti-immigration groups poison the well on immigration reform in America,” said PFAW Senior Fellow Peter Montgomery. “Yet despite the fact that these groups peddle misinformation and pander to the xenophobic fringe to further their anti-immigration goals, they continue to wield influence in the media, in Congress, and on the campaign trail.”

Tanton, a retired ophthalmologist who helped establish groups such as the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), NumbersUSA and the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), was not shy about the racist agenda of his anti-immigrant activism:

In leaked memos from a 1986 strategy session, Tanton fretted specifically about Latino immigration — or what he called a “Latin onslaught” — seeing it as a threat to America’s white majority. He wrote that white Americans would have to “compete” with Latino immigrants and choose between having children and letting “someone else with greater reproductive powers occupy the space.”

“As whites see their power and control over their lives declining,” he asked, “will they simply go quietly into the night? Or will there be an explosion?”

In a 1996 letter, Tanton fretted about “less intelligent” people having children: “Do we leave it to individuals to decide that they are the intelligent ones who should have more kids? And more troublesome, what about the less intelligent, who logically should have less? Who is going to break the bad news [to less intelligent individuals], and how will it be implemented?” At one point, Tanton founded his own pro-eugenics organization, the Society for Genetic Education. He also authored a paper titled “The Case for Passive Eugenics.”

When the SPLC read through Tanton’s papers in 2008, the group found “a lengthy record of friendly correspondence with Holocaust deniers, a former Klan lawyer and leading white nationalist thinkers.”

One of these correspondents was Harry Weyher, a fellow eugenics proponent who for decades led a “race betterment” group, the Pioneer Fund, which became a financier of FAIR.

Tanton even established a media outlet specifically promoting his vision for white America, including the work of one activist who helped organize the racist pro-Trump robocalls in Iowa:

One of John Tanton’s most revealing creations is the Social Contract Press, an organization that SPLC lists as a hate group because it “routinely publishes race-baiting articles penned by white nationalists.” The press, which Tanton founded in 1990, is run out of Tanton’s foundation, U.S. Inc.

The Social Contract Press publishes a journal, “The Social Contract,” which Tanton edited for the first eight years of its existence. While Tanton continues to serve as the journal’s publisher, it is now edited by Wayne Lutton, who, according to SPLC, “has held leadership positions in four other white national hate groups,” including the Council of Conservative Citizens, and has said that white Americans “are the real Americans, not the Hmong, not Latinos, not the Siberian-Americans.”

“The Social Contract” has published a wide range of racist views, including an issue dedicated to attacking “multiculturalism” for replacing “successful Euro-American culture” and another issue dedicated entirely to reprinting articles from the white nationalist site VDARE. (Officials at CIS and at FAIR have also written for VDARE, which is named after Virginia Dare, thought to be the first child of English colonists born in America; one VDARE contributor, Jared Taylor, lent his voice to a robo-call urging Iowans to caucus for Trump because “we need smart, well-educated white people who assimilate to our culture” instead of Muslim immigrants.) FAIR spokesman Ira Mehlman has written several articles for “The Social Contract.”

Despite the Social Contract Press’ white nationalist ties, it continues to attract prominent members of the anti-immigrant movement, including members of the Tanton network, to its annual Writers Workshop. People who have spoken at the workshops include CIS Executive Director Mark Krikorian and policy staffer Jessica Vaughan and longtime FAIR attorney and Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach. The year Vaughan spoke to the workshop, one of her fellow speakers was Peter Brimelow, founder and editor of the white nationalist website VDARE. Rep. Brian Babin, the Texas Republican who has become a leading voice in Congress against refugee resettlement, spoke at the 2015 Social Contract Writers Workshop.

And yet, the GOP continues to rely on the Tanton network to shape their party’s approach to immigration reform.

Wiles: 'Somebody With A Lot Of Money' Orchestrating Syrian Refugee Crisis

Inveterate conspiracy theorist Rick Wiles invited two prominent anti-immigration activists onto his “ Trunews” program yesterday to discuss attempts to resettle the millions of refugees from Syria’s civil war, but couldn’t get too far into the discussion before announcing that someone “orchestrated” the refugee crisis in order to destroy “the existing order.”

The refugee crisis, along with the “contrived, orchestrated, choreographed crisis” of unaccompanied Central American children fleeing to the southern U.S. border last year, he said, must be part of a grand plot run by “somebody with a lot of money.”

“I am convinced all of this is orchestrated,” he said. “Somebody with a lot of money wants a chaotic scene in the world, they want mass migration. It’s breaking down borders, sovereignty, culture, it’s destroying the existing order.”

Jessica Vaughan of the Center for Immigration Studies, who was making her second appearance on Wiles’ program, responded cautiously, saying, “Well, I don’t know if it’s orchestrated, but it is obvious that there are organizations with an ideological agenda who are certainly taking advantage of it to push their political and ideological aims.”

Refugee Resettlement Watch’s Ann Corcoran seemed more willing to embrace Wiles’ theory, saying, “I hope someday we will find out who it is behind this and who these powers are” but that in the meantime, she agrees with Vaughan.

Krikorian: If Picture Of Drowned Syrian Boy Made You Sad, You Should Oppose Refugee Resettlement

Mark Krikorian of the Center for Immigration Studies visited Newsmax TV yesterday to discuss the Obama administration’s decision to increase the number of Syrian refugees admitted into the United States in the wake of a massive refugee crisis caused by the country’s civil war, agreeing to take in 10,000 of the more than 4 million people who have fled the country.

Citing the Tsarnaev brothers, who were the children of refugees from Chechnya, Krikoran declared that the refugee resettlement program is “guaranteed” to “admit significant numbers of ISIS and Al Qaeda into the United States.”

“We all saw the picture of that poor kid who had drowned on the beach in Turkey,” he said. “Well, what are we going to say to an American mom and dad of a kid who’s killed by an ISIS terrorist who’s let in as a refugee?”

Anti-Immigrant Activist Warns Muslim Refugees Are Part Of Liberal Plot

Anti-Muslim activist Frank Gaffney invited Mark Krikorian of the Center for Immigration Studies, a group that advocates for increased restrictions on immigration, on to his “Secure Freedom Radio” program yesterday, where predictably the two got to talking about efforts to settle some refugees from Muslim countries such as Iraq and Syria, which have both experienced refugee crises, in the United States.

Gaffney told Krikorian that conservative writer James Simpson has written a new e-book for Gaffney’s Center for Security Policy about “what he calls the ‘red-green’ axis and the impact that it is having, sort of the hard-left and the Islamists, in erasing America.”

“Does this sound right to you that there is this kind of dynamic at work between the hard-left and the Islamists?” he asked.

Krikorian agreed, bringing up a column written by a speechwriter for former British Prime Minister Tony Blair who said that Labour leaders hoped expanded immigration would “rub the Right's nose in diversity and render their arguments out of date.” (The writer, in response to right-wing glee, later clarified that this wasn’t a “plot” to impose multiculturalism on an unwilling Britain.)

“I think the dynamic here is the kind of thing we heard about in the Blair government in England,” Krikorian said, “when one of his people, one of his advisors, basically said, look, we pushed immigration as a way to unwillingly force diversity on the British people, to change the nation. And I think a lot of these refugee activists types and immigration activists see immigration in the same way and see Islamic immigration as the most different and non-American way of promoting immigration and therefore serving their purposes the most, even more than, say, the immigration of people from, say, Latin America or Christians from the Middle East, that sort of thing.”

Right-Wing Pundit: Bring Back Literacy Tests For Voting!

In a column for the National Review on Tuesday, Mark Krikorian of the Center for Immigration Studies proposed requiring formerly incarcerated people to pass what is essentially a literacy test in order to regain their right to vote.

Krikorian praised Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan’s recent veto of a bill expanding voting rights for ex-felons but added that conservatives should give “more thought” to the issue of reenfranchising formerly incarcerated people, who because of disparities in the criminal justice system are disproportionately African American.

His idea: requiring ex-felons to pass the same citizenship test in order to regain their right to vote that immigrants pass in order to become citizens:

[G]iven that such a large share of, especially, our black fellow citizens is formally disenfranchised because of past criminality, it behooves conservatives for both policy and political reasons to give the issue of re-enfranchisement more thought. One approach that might work as a policy matter in politically reintegrating those released felons who are interested — and also send a message of openness to the penitent — would be to follow the example of naturalization of immigrants.

While the reasons differ, both felons and resident foreigners are excluded from participation in political life. The way foreigners overcome this exclusion is by ceasing to be foreigners through acquisition of U.S. citizenship. They do this by passing a basic test (probably a little too basic) on U.S. history and civics and by demonstrating (in most cases) a basic ability to read, write, and understand English. Once they swear the Oath of Allegiance, they are enfranchised as citizens of the United States.

This process, he writes, would allow ex-felons “moral readmission to the political community” and show potential employers that those who have passed “might be a cut above the average ex-con”:

Following this model for released felons would have a number of benefits. It would send the message that re-enfranchisement is not merely a matter of paperwork but of a moral readmission to the political community. It would teach some elementary civics and history that the ex-cons probably never learned in school. And if accompanied by a certificate of some kind, it could signal to potential employers that the bearer might be a cut above the average ex-con.

But liberals won’t like his idea of reinstating literacy tests, Krikorian says, because “they don’t particularly like America” so they don’t want anybody learning civics:

The lefty groups pushing to accelerate and simplify re-enfranchisement won’t like this for at least two reasons: Their goal is electing more Democrats, pure and simple, and anything that might stand in the way is unacceptable. And more fundamentally, they don’t particularly like America, and requiring a victim of The Man to pass a history test not written by Howard Zinn is repellent.

CIS Official Wonders Why Black Lives Matter Demonstrators Aren't Protesting Immigrants

In an interview with Florida radio host Joyce Kaufman yesterday, Center for Immigration Studies policy director Jessica Vaughn wondered why Black Lives Matter demonstrators protesting police brutality toward African Americans and inequities in the criminal justice system aren’t protesting against immigrants instead.

Vaughn’s comments echo the anti-immigration movement’s long-held — but so far ineffective — strategy of trying to stir up resentment against immigrants in the African American community.

Kaufman began the discussion by complaining about traffic problems resulting from the Black Lives Matter protests and bizarrely claiming that if the demonstrators really cared about black lives in America they would be protesting the recent massacre of 2,000 people by Boko Haram in Nigeria: “It’s interesting why I don’t see Black Lives Matter protesters in Nigeria, where they just killed 2,000 people, but I guess black lives only matter to George Soros and that ilk when they’re here.”

“Yeah, how about black job opportunities matter?” Vaughn said, referring to a Brietbart News report that some undocumented immigrants have been released from detention pending further court reviews of their cases, whom she claimed would take jobs from African Americans.

“It’s pure insanity and shows that the president’s executive amnesty has nothing to do with more efficient enforcement or reuniting families or righting wrongs of some kind in our immigration laws or preventing civil rights violations,” Vaughn added. “It’s all about completely dismantling immigration law and letting everyone stay, and I’m sure in the hope that these people will ultimately associate their life in the United States with the Democratic Party.”

Top Anti-Immigrant 'Expert' Says 'Being Hung, Drawn And Quartered' Is 'Too Good' For Obama

A senior policy analyst for the Center for Immigration Studies, which bills itself as the think tank of the anti-immigrant Right, told a Florida-based Tea Party group last week that President Obama not only deserves impeachment, but that “being hung, drawn and quartered is probably too good for him.”

The Center for New Community’s Imagine 2050 blog first reported on Stephen Steinlight’s remarks.

Steinlight also said that John Boehner’s lawsuit against the president is a “political loser” and claimed that while Obama deserves to be impeached, such an effort would backfire on Republicans.

CIS describes Steinlight as “one of the nation’s most insightful voices on immigration” who provides “expert testimony” for government panels.

A rash of opinion polls which have come out, not push polls, real polls, including one by Gallup that showed that 65 percent of the American people don’t want any part of an Obama-style immigration reform. But the idea of this [lawsuit] is vintage Boehner, it’s a political loser. There is no court that is going to stop Obama from doing anything. We all know, if there ever was a president that deserved to be impeached, it’s this guy. Alright? I mean, I wouldn’t stop. I would think being hung, drawn, and quartered is probably too good for him.

UPDATE (7/24): CIS now says that Steinlight has been "reprimanded" for his remarks:

When reached for comment, Steven Camarota, director of research at CIS, distanced the organization from Steinlight's remarks.

"Steve was speaking figuratively and hyperbolically, obviously, for effect. In that respect his intemperate comments were similar to those who are often critics of President Bush, and I would say like those comments, they are ill-advised," Camarota told The Huffington Post. "I would also say that the Center for Immigration Studies does not in fact support drawing and quartering the president."

CIS officials also said Steinlight had been disciplined and instructed to avoid similar rhetoric in the future.

"I reprimanded him and put a reprimand in his personnel file," said CIS Executive Director Mark Krikorian.

CIS is an organization that advocates reducing immigration into the United States. Steinlight has said that Hispanic immigration would lead to the "unmaking of America," and that Muslims should be banned from immigrating to the United States because they "believe in things that are subversive to the Constitution."

"Steve sometimes has used impolitic language and I admonished him to choose his words more carefully in the future," Krikorian said.

More Fuzzy Math From the Center for Immigration Studies

This week, the Center for Immigration Studies — the “think tank” of the anti-immigrant movement — released yet another document meant to feed the opposition to immigration reform, this one alleging that “all employment growth since 2000 went to immigrants.”

CIS’s report has been promoted across conservative media and by fellow anti-immigrant activists like Phyllis Schlafly.

But, just like the group’s recent report alleging that the Obama administration had released tens of thousands of criminal undocumented immigrants, this one doesn’t hold up to the smallest amount of scrutiny.

Conservative Boston Globe columnist Jeff Jacoby devoted his column yesterday to puncturing CIS’s “stolen job myth”:

To begin with, the number of native-born Americans working in 2014 has not declined since 2000. It has increased by 2.6 million. The authors of the report acknowledge as much in an endnote. It is only by excluding the record-high cohort of workers 65 and older, one of the fastest-growing age groups in the labor market, that Camarota and Ziegler can claim that immigrants are taking all the available new jobs. But it is just as plausible to blame the long-term stagnation in the employment of “working-age” American natives on older employees as on those born in other lands. Should senior citizens who wish to work be forced to retire at 65?

In the zero-sum world of the anti-immigrant advocates, foreign-born workers can only gain at the expense of the native-born. But in the real world, immigration generally enlarges the economy, boosts productivity, and adds jobs. Immigrants amount to less than 13 percent of the US population. Yet 28 percent of all new American companies launched in 2011, as Rupert Murdoch wrote in a Wall Street Journal essay last month, were founded by immigrants.

Broadly speaking, immigrant workers and US-born workers are not substitutes but complements; because they tend to have different skills, they generally don’t compete for the same jobs. Immigrants are more likely to be employed at the high or low ends of the labor market, explains Alex Nowrasteh of the Cato Institute, while most Americans have skills in the middle. Supplying the immigrant skills needed by the economy simultaneously enlarges demand for native skills.

Restrictionists hint at some kind of inverse correlation between gains in employment for US-born and foreign-born workers, but they can’t show what doesn’t exist. Look past their tendentious presentation of the data, as Nowrasteh wrote about an earlier Center for Immigration Studies report, and you notice that for the most part “net gains in employment for natives and immigrants move in the same direction.” When natives gain, immigrants gain, and vice versa. We all work in the same labor market.

The fundamental flaws in the CIS report are similar to those in the infamous and widely panned Heritage Foundation study that produced a wildly inflated figure for the “cost” of immigration reform based on the assumption that immigrants wouldn’t be productive or expand the economy. (An assumption that itself was likely linked to one of its author’s racist views on intelligence).

Judicial Watch: Obama 'Engineered' Border Crisis To Force Vote On Immigration Reform

Yet another anti-immigrant activist is claiming that President Obama orchestrated the crisis at the southern border in order to push a vote on immigration reform.

Sean Dunagan of Judicial Watch tells the American Family Association’s OneNewsNow today that Obama “engineered” the influx of families and unaccompanied children in order to “make current immigration law look as cruel and inhumane as they possibly can to possibly build political support for some additional amnesty program”:

Dunagan suggests Obama is opening the floodgates to these young illegal aliens for purely political reasons.

"It seems to be that the administration is trying to make current immigration law look as cruel and inhumane as they possibly can to possibly build political support for some additional amnesty program," he says. "I absolutely believe that it's being engineered and exploited to try force action into bad policy decisions and bad votes on the issue."

Last week, Republican congressmen Steve King and Steve Stockman claimed that the influx of immigrants was part of an Obama administration plot to increase the Democratic vote . Anti-immigrant activist William Gheen has also claimed that the crisis was “orchestrated” by President Obama and George Soros.

On his program last week, Glenn Beck also claimed that the border crisis is part of a plot to pass immigration reform and to ultimately return Arizona to Mexico:

To his credit, Mark Krikorian of the Center for Immigration Studies, one of the anti-immigration reform movement’s most prominent spokespeople, has pushed back on the conspiracy theory.

Pat Buchanan: 'Third World Invasion' Causing West To 'Disappear Forever'

In his column today, Pat Buchanan responds to a flawed and misleading Center for Immigration Studies report by spouting off on “the Third World invasion of the United States.”

“[P]eoples from failed states of the Third World are steadily filling up our countries and reducing our native-born into slowly shrinking national majorities,” he laments. “If this continues over many more decades, Western nations as we knew them will disappear forever, and be remade in the image of those who have newly arrived, and the countries whence they came.”

How goes the Third World invasion of the United States?

America and the West must face up to what is happening to our countries and our civilization. Or we are going to lose them both forever.

Treating with contempt U.S. and European laws, peoples from failed states of the Third World are steadily filling up our countries and reducing our native-born into slowly shrinking national majorities.

If this continues over many more decades, Western nations as we knew them will disappear forever, and be remade in the image of those who have newly arrived, and the countries whence they came.

When, ever, did Americans vote for this?

What would constitute a pro-American immigration policy?

A moratorium on all immigration until unemployment among U.S. citizens falls below five percent. A 15-foot security fence from San Diego to the Gulf, with Border Patrol outposts every 10 miles. Fines and community service for businessmen who hire illegal aliens.

Rick Wiles Suggests Deporting Undocumented Immigrants By Pushing Them Out Of Cargo Planes With Parachutes

As Fox News commentator Todd Starnes learned back in March, appearing on the radio show of End Times pastor Rick Wiles can involve sitting through rants about how the Sandy Hook and Columbine shootings were carried out by CIA mind-control assassins,” Miley Cyrus sold her soul to Satan and had sex with a demon, President Obama is a Jim-Jones-likeNazi antichrist working to bring about a civil war, and Adolf Hitler’s “race of super gay male soldiers” is currently taking over America.

Center for Immigration Studies policy director Jessica Vaughan learned a similar lesson when she appeared on Wiles’ show yesterday to promote her group’s flawed new report on the release of undocumented immigrants from detention. As Vaughan walked through various reasons why it can be difficult to deport some undocumented immigrants, Wiles cut in with his own suggestion:

“Hey, you put ‘em on a C-130 cargo plane and strap a parachute to ‘em and you push ‘em out the door. It’s solved.”

Vaughan laughed: “Well, people have suggested that.”

Vaughan might have gotten some idea of the kind of interview she was in for if she had listened to the beginning of the program, which Wiles devoted to repeating his claim that Obama’s reelection amounted to the “communist takeover of the United States of America.”

He warned that Obama and his “internal revolutionary party of communists” will “eradicate Christianity,” outlaw its practice and eventually “bulldoze Christian churches in Dallas, Texas.”

The communists want to eradicate all recognition of Christianity. That’s what’s happening right now in the United States of America under this communist Barack Obama. And I have been saying since 2007, when this man first started running for president, that he is a communist.

And it is clearly obvious now that this United States of America has been overthrown by an internal regime, an internal revolutionary party of communists. That is what’s happening in this country. And if they are not stopped, they will eradicate Christianity and there will come a day in America when the federal government will bulldoze Christian churches Dallas, Texas. I promise you this is where it’s going. This is an all-out communist takeover of the United States of America.

And most of the American people are sitting there like bumps on a log and they can’t comprehend what’s taking place. Obama is getting away with this communist takeover. And Christianity is being outlawed in this country just like they’re doing it in China.

White Nationalists Demand Credit For Another Idea That's Gone Mainstream In The GOP

The white nationalist website VDARE is once again demanding credit for an idea that it has been championing for years that has now gone mainstream in the GOP.

Last year, we reported that VDARE writer John Derbyshire (formerly of the National Review) was annoyed that prominent Republicans were failing to credit racist VDARE writer Steve Sailer when they advocated a plan nearly identical to the ‘Sailer Strategy’: that is, the idea that the GOP can only survive by solidifying and growing its white base while alienating people of color. Sailer had been persistently advocating this tactic for over a decade when it suddenly came into vogue among conservatives who opposed the Gang of Eight’s immigration reform plan.

Now, another VDARE writer is upset that more and more immigration reform opponents are pushing another VDARE argument without giving the white nationalists credit. This time, the argument is that steady or increased legal immigration – with or without a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrations – will ruin the Republican party because immigrants are inherently liberal.

In a post on Friday, VDARE writer James Fulford highlights a recent study from the Center for Immigration Studies which argues that Republicans shouldn’t bother with immigration reform because immigrants will inevitably vote for Democrats. Fulford complains that neither the CIS report nor the conservative outlets covering it “manages to credit Peter Brimelow or VDARE.com for saying all this early and often, possibly because it they're scared of Media Matters and the SPLC.” As he notes, VDARE has been pushing the argument since as early as 2001.

The CIS report solidifies what has become a common talking point among even relatively mainstream anti-immigrant groups. CIS spokespeople repeatedly argue that the country shouldn’t “ import more” immigrants because they’ll never vote Republican anyway. Phyllis Schlafly’s Eagle Forum has also been pushing this line of argument and released its own report on the subject. Schlafly probably put the argument the most succinctly when she said in February, “These immigrants, legal and illegal, coming in don’t really understand our country and will probably vote Democratic .” She also suggested that Latino immigrants “don’t understand” the Bill of Rights and reject American values.

It’s no surprise that this idea originated in the racist underworld of VDARE. After all, the subtext of the argument is that the GOP should rely on what Pat Buchanan called a new “Southern Strategy” and dump any plans to expand its appeal beyond its mostly white base. As the “Southern Strategy” comparison makes clear, that involves both scapegoating immigrants and ignoring their voices in government.

Mark Krikorian Claims 'No Family Is Ever Split By Immigration Law'

Center for Immigration studies executive director Mark Krikorian insisted in an interview on VCY America’s Crosstalk yesterday that “no family is ever split by immigration law.”

Addressing situations where the undocumented parent of an American citizen is deported, Krikorian said, “No child is ever taken away from a person who is deported, because children can always go with their parents, which is what they should do.”

“No family is ever split by immigration law,” he said. “It’s the decisions of the immigrants themselves either to come here and split their families.”

Between 2010 and 2012, the country conducted 200,000 deportations of parents of U.S. citizens. An Applied Research Center investigation in 2011 found that at least 5,100 children whose parents had been detained or deported were thrown into the U.S. foster care system. Last year, President Obama issued a directive aimed at curbing detentions of parents who are the primary caregivers of minor children.

No child is ever taken away from a person who is deported, because children can always go with their parents, which is what they should do, it’s the appropriate thing to do. Or if the kids are born here, they have the right to stay too, and the parents, if they can find an aunt or somebody else for the kids to stay with, they can do that, that’s their prerogative. No family is ever split by immigration law. It’s the decisions of the immigrants themselves either to come here and split their families, or to stay here illegally, they have American children then they’re caught up into it and decide not to take their families back with them. That’s where the decision comes from that ends up splitting families.

Arpaio Tells Anti-Semitic Paper Immigration Reform Meant 'To Pacify The Hispanic Community'

In an interview with an anti-Semitic and conspiracy-theory promoting newspaper last month, Sheriff Joe Arpaio claimed that President Obama’s support for immigration reform is an attempt “to pacify the Hispanic community.”

In contrast, Arpaio told American Free Press, “I have a gun and badge. I don’t talk. I take action,”

“I have a gun and badge. I don’t talk. I take action,” said the legendary lawman from Maricopa County, Arizona. “I’m against amnesty, and no one should receive a get-out-of-jail-free card. I believe in following the law.”

Arpaio recounted how his efforts to uphold the law have been undermined by the federal government. “The president is trying to circumvent our laws to pacify the Hispanic community,” he said. “I spent 27 years as a DEA [Drug Enforcement Administration] regional director in Mexico City, Texas and Arizona, plus 21 years as a sheriff. With over 50 years of law enforcement experience, I’d say this gives me some credibility. Yet, not once has anyone from Obama’s Cabinet asked for my opinion or assistance. They don’t want local law enforcement helping them enforce the law. It’s very sad.”

American Free Press was founded by anti-Semitic activist Willis Carto, and regularly pushes anti-Semitic conspiracy theories. It has recently pushed the conspiracy theory that the Sandy Hook shooting didn’t actually happen.

The Center for New Community notes that two activists from prominent anti-immigrant groups also gave interviews to American Free Press:

Thorn’s article also includes comments from NumbersUSA’s Director of Content and Activism Chris Chmielenski and Jessica Vaughan, Director of Policy Studies at the anti-immigrant Center for Immigration Studies (CIS). Vaughan used the interview to discuss findings from a highly misleading report she authored last month on interior immigration enforcement.

CIS's Steinlight: Ban Muslim Immigration Because 'Muslims Believe In Things That Are Subversive To The Constitution'

In a speech to the Pearland, Texas, Tea Party last week, Center For Immigration Studies policy analyst Stephen Steinlight said that he would like to bring back the anti-communist McCarran Act in order to ban all Muslim immigration into the US.

Steinlight made his comments in response to audience member who asked, “Which is the quicker ticking time bomb: the illegal immigration through basically just amnesty, or the Muslim infiltration through radicals crossing the border?”

“I don’t know what on earth we can do about Muslim immigration, I really don’t,” he said. “I mean, if I had my druthers, we would bring back something like the McCarran act in the 50s, which barred communists and fascists on the grounds that they believe in things that are subversive to the Constitution. Well, Muslims believe in things that are subversive to the Constitution.”

“I think Islam is not so much a religion as a hideous totalitarian political creed looking for world supremacy,” he added.

He also criticized President Obama for associating with groups supposedly connected with the Holy Land Foundation trial (in 2010, a federal judge found that prosecutors had violated the Fifth Amendment rights of a number of American Islamic groups by naming them in connection with the trial). “I mean this is an administration that seems to despise our friends and love our enemies,” he said.

Questioner: Which is the quicker ticking time bomb: the illegal immigration through basically just amnesty, or the Muslim infiltration through radicals crossing the border? Which is the greater ticking time bomb for us?

Steinlight: Well, good question. I would say that they represent dangers, each in its own way, that are almost equal in their potential to be deeply harmful. I mean, Western Europe is going, if not gone. I don’t know what on earth we can do about Muslim immigration, I really don’t. I mean, if I had my druthers, we would bring back something like the McCarran act in the 50s, which barred communists and fascists on the grounds that they believe in things that are subversive to the Constitution. Well, Muslims believe in things that are subversive to the Constitution.

And we know that, we know that from their own writing and we know that from the Holy Land trial in 2008, all the organizations signing a document that said, we will destroy their evil house from inside. And, by the way, as you know, the people who are signatories have that document have been welcomed into the White House, have been honored. I mean this is an administration that seems to despise our friends and love our enemies.

It’s a great danger. I think Islam is not so much a religion as a hideous totalitarian political creed looking for world supremacy. And the only, the saving grace there is that the numbers, at least up to now, have been relatively know. But the capacity to do great damage is still there. I mean, it only took, what, 18 people, to destroy the World Trade Center.

CIS's Steinlight: Immigration Reform A 'Psychotic' 'Plot Against America' That Will Kill The Constitution

In a speech to a Texas Tea Party group last week, Center For Immigration Studies senior policy analyst Stephen Steinlight warned that comprehensive immigration reform “amounts to a plot against America” that will kill the Constitution and cause Americans to “lose our liberty.” He called GOP reform supporters “psychotic,” joked that he’d like to attack pro-immigration religious leaders with “a baseball bat,” and speculated about a potential war between Texas and the federal government over immigration enforcement.

In a speech to the Pearland Tea Party on March 18, Steinlight posited that the Gang of Eight’s immigration proposal “amounts to a plot against America,” warning that it if it were to pass, “America will become California and the GOP will wither and die.” Republicans who support the bill, he said, “are psychotic, so greedy as to be politically blind, or just stupid.”

He went on to warn that if comprehensive immigration reform passes, “we will lose our liberty and become a one-party state" and the nation will “be balkanized along ethnic and cultural lines and lose its cohesion,” bringing about “the erosion of the middle class and the emergence of a vast, restive permanent underclass” (a theory straight of the Heritage Foundation’s infamously biased immigration study). He added that for good measure, “We will watch the Constitution become a dead letter, as the rule of law is overthrown.”

But Steinlight saved his greatest contempt for the many religious leaders who support immigration reform, saying, “God help me, find a baseball bat, there would be a whole lot fewer of them around.”

We’ll scrutinize the Gang of Eight’s draft bill, S744, because it’s the establishment’s policy template on both sides of the aisle, they’re all the same. Irredeemably flawed, it amounts to a plot against America

This [inaudible] guest worker program, what it means is an exponential increase in a constituency that will make the Democratic party the permanent ruling party in America. It will make the Democrats the PRI of the United States. All America will become California and the GOP will wither and die. The center of American politics will lurch far to the left. Republicans who support amnesty are psychotic, so greedy as to be politically blind, or just stupid.

If comprehensive immigration reform passes, we will lose our liberty and become a one-party state, we will watch our nation be balkanized along ethnic and cultural lines and lose its social cohesion, as we witness what is an essence a population transfer from another country with a different language, a different culture, which will become the dominant demographic in this country. We will witness the erosion of the middle class and the emergence of a vast, restive permanent underclass. We will watch the Constitution become a dead letter, as the rule of law is overthrown.

We did a study, a huge study, we got a lot of money from our main donor. And, by the way, we divided the study along religious lines, because we were interested in watching, because religious leaders – God help me, find a baseball bat, there would be a whole lot fewer of them around – but they are all of them, right across the spectrum, are the leaders of the amnesty. From the Conference of Catholic Bishops to every Jewish organization to the National Conference of Churches, all of them are all in the same league.

During the question-and-answer session of the presentation, an audience member asked Steinlight if the federal government would “go to war” with Texas if people in the state were to start “taking care of our own border.”

Steinlight replied that if that happens, “The federal government will send the United States Army into Texas and disarm you, violently or nonviolently.”

He compared such an event to the National Guard enforcing desegregation in the South, but told the audience member not to be offended by the comparison to segregationists.

Questioner: Now what would happen if the state of Texas, the Texas militia, just decided to heck with the federal government, put our militia on the border, started taking care of our own border? Would the federal government come after us?

Steinlight: Yeah.

Questioner: Would they actually bring in the military to do it?

Steinlight: I believe they would.

Questioner: So they would go to war with their own people to keep these people…

Steinlight: That’s correct. I mean, obviously, I’m not talking about the same context at all, so don’t be offended. If you think about what happened, say, in the South, during desegregation, when governors who wanted to defend integration used the National Guard – the federal government sent the 101st Airborne Division out. What I’m telling you right now is that if Texas militia, in Washington language, ‘takes the law into its own hands,’ that is to say tries to enforce the law that the federal government will not enforce, right? The federal government will send the United States Army into Texas and disarm you, violently or nonviolently. They will not permit it. They will regard it as an act of sedition. I’m not saying it in a supportive way, I’m saying there’s no other path they would take.

Krikorian Presents Democratic Immigration Reform-Health Insurance Conspiracy Theory

In a video address to the alternative CPAC conferenced hosted by Breitbart News today, Center for Immigration Studies executive director Mark Krikorian claimed that Democrats support higher levels of immigration so that they can “import voters” and “create the conditions, such as increased poverty, increased lack of health insurance, that lead even non-immigrant voters to be more receptive to big government solutions” and to vote Democratic.

Syndicate content

Center for Immigration Studies Posts Archive

Miranda Blue, Friday 08/19/2016, 12:43pm
Donald Trump is out with his first TV ad of the general election, and it’s predictably despicable: an image of “Hillary Clinton’s America” being flooded with refugees and “illegal immigrants convicted of committing crimes” while “the system stays rigged against Americans.” The ad has drawn comparisons to the infamous anti-immigrant ad that California Gov. Pete Wilson ran in 1994 as he was trying to push through a ballot measure imposing draconian penalties on undocumented immigrants. The ad, also unsurprisingly, cites the Center for... MORE >
Kyle Mantyla, Tuesday 06/14/2016, 5:33pm
Peter Montgomery @ Huffington Post: The Hypocrisy of the Religious Right’s LGBT-Islamist Alliance Smear. Zack Kopplin @ Think Progress: Public Schools Across The Country Are Violating The Separation Of Church And State. Hemant Mehta @ Friendly Atheist: Christian Pastor on Gay Victims in Orlando Massacre: “The Tragedy Is That More of Them Didn’t Die”. Eric Boehlert @ Media Matters: It’s Not Just Trump: Suggesting Obama’s A Terrorist Sympathizer Has Been A Cornerstone Of The Conservative Media. Sarah Viets @ Hatewatch: Center... MORE >
Miranda Blue, Wednesday 03/23/2016, 1:25pm
Rosemary Jenks, the director of government relations at the anti-immigration group NumbersUSA, claimed yesterday that Democrats are pressing for immigration reform because they “look at all the people around the world” as “potential Democratic voters in the United States” and hope that immigrants will cast Democratic votes even before becoming citizens. The Center for Security Policy’s Frank Gaffney interviewed Jenks on his “Secure Freedom Radio” program yesterday, asking her if immigration plans like Hillary Clinton’s would just serve as... MORE >
Brian Tashman, Monday 02/29/2016, 5:10pm
It shouldn’t be surprising that Donald Trump has refused to renounce support from the leader of the Ku Klux Klan, as the GOP presidential frontrunner has relied on the backing of white nationalists throughout his campaign. A new report released today by People For the American Way observes that many of the leading anti-immigrant groups in the U.S. are rooted in white nationalism and fears about a “Latin onslaught,” as John Tanton, the founder of a network of Nativist groups, put it. “These leading anti-immigration groups poison the well on immigration reform in America... MORE >
Miranda Blue, Tuesday 10/20/2015, 12:49pm
Inveterate conspiracy theorist Rick Wiles invited two prominent anti-immigration activists onto his “ Trunews” program yesterday to discuss attempts to resettle the millions of refugees from Syria’s civil war, but couldn’t get too far into the discussion before announcing that someone “orchestrated” the refugee crisis in order to destroy “the existing order.” The refugee crisis, along with the “contrived, orchestrated, choreographed crisis” of unaccompanied Central American children fleeing to the southern U.S. border last year, he... MORE >
Miranda Blue, Thursday 09/17/2015, 3:38pm
Mark Krikorian of the Center for Immigration Studies visited Newsmax TV yesterday to discuss the Obama administration’s decision to increase the number of Syrian refugees admitted into the United States in the wake of a massive refugee crisis caused by the country’s civil war, agreeing to take in 10,000 of the more than 4 million people who have fled the country. Citing the Tsarnaev brothers, who were the children of refugees from Chechnya, Krikoran declared that the refugee resettlement program is “guaranteed” to “admit significant numbers of ISIS and Al Qaeda... MORE >
Miranda Blue, Tuesday 06/09/2015, 1:09pm
Anti-Muslim activist Frank Gaffney invited Mark Krikorian of the Center for Immigration Studies, a group that advocates for increased restrictions on immigration, on to his “Secure Freedom Radio” program yesterday, where predictably the two got to talking about efforts to settle some refugees from Muslim countries such as Iraq and Syria, which have both experienced refugee crises, in the United States. Gaffney told Krikorian that conservative writer James Simpson has written a new e-book for Gaffney’s Center for Security Policy about “what he calls the ‘red-... MORE >
Miranda Blue, Thursday 05/28/2015, 10:00am
In a column for the National Review on Tuesday, Mark Krikorian of the Center for Immigration Studies proposed requiring formerly incarcerated people to pass what is essentially a literacy test in order to regain their right to vote. Krikorian praised Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan’s recent veto of a bill expanding voting rights for ex-felons but added that conservatives should give “more thought” to the issue of reenfranchising formerly incarcerated people, who because of disparities in the criminal justice system are disproportionately African American. His idea: requiring ex-... MORE >