Archives for category: Immigration

Anand Giridharadas is a brilliant thinker who has a blog called The Ink. In his latest post, he prints whole sections of Trump’s incendiary campaign speech in Vandalia, Ohio, and gives a close reading to his language. (Something oddly appropriate about the location since Trump is the King of Vandals.)

Anand’s parsing of Trump’s words is incisive. I’m posting only part of it, and Anand has made this post available for free. I urge you to open the link and read it all.

He writes:

Former President Donald Trump’s fascist performance art this past weekend in Vandalia, Ohio, was ostensibly a stump speech for someone else. But you could be forgiven for forgetting that. In what was effectively his first real rally since clinching the GOP nomination, Trump offered a grim vision of America and a patchwork of unhinged tirades against his usual targets. Yet there was more to it than that.

There is little value in fact-checking the former president’s words, given that the great majority of them bore so little relationship to reality that you quickly realize their purpose could only be to destabilize reality altogether. They simply restate dozens of well-worn lies, from birtherism up through the Big Lie, interspersed with a smattering of playground insults, projection, and a stew of misunderstood economic schemes and xenophobic delusions that do the work of standing in for policy ideas. This is a hole of lies that cannot be filled with facts.

But that doesn’t mean the speech wasn’t worth paying attention to. And, being of the reading sort, we suggest there is value in reading the text, not just rage-consuming the viral videos everyone has been rehashing.

We think all Americans need to take Trump’s speech both seriously and literally as the what-you-see-is-what-you’ll-get messaging of a would-be dictator. These are things that are actually being said, in public, by a person who has already occupied the world’s most powerful position and seeks to occupy it again. It’s an advertisement for autocracy that — give it this at least — complies with the notion of truth in advertising. And as Masha Gessen has reminded us, “Rule no. 1 is to listen to and believe the autocrat.”

What we look at below is how Trump’s rhetorical performance works, how it functions. In many of these examples, the “meaning” isn’t important, and that’s why the goal here isn’t to question his command of the facts. He’s making these statements without much pretense to knowing the facts in the first place; rather, he’s looking for maximum emotional impact. He fights entirely on the battleground of emotion, and that, Ruth Ben-Ghiat has reminded us, is pretty much what autocrats have always done.

Trump’s language here — from stabs in the back to dystopian visions of foreign nations seeking to flood the American body politic with their unwanted criminals — has plenty of precedent in the words of the strongmen of the past and present. He goes out of his way to praise Hungary’s Viktor Orbán, perhaps returning thefavor for Orban’s snub of the sitting U.S. government on his recent visit to the U.S.

And it’s the fact that this speech follows that well-established playbook that demands we pay attention. His words may be murky. What he plans to do to us is clear.

We’ve made this piece free and open to all. We hope it will make you think about these critical issues in new ways, and give you a glimpse of the posts that go out to our supporting subscribers each week. We encourage you to join our community, and to share our work with yours! And we have a rare special offer to entice you: 20% off forever!

The Victim King

Because I’m being indicted for you and never forget our enemies want to take away my freedom because I will never let them take away your freedom.

I’m being persecuted. I think more than anybody, but who the hell knows? You know, all my life…you’ve heard of Andrew Jackson. He was actually a great general and a very good president. They say that he was persecuted as president more than anybody else. Second was Abraham Lincoln. This is just what they said. This is in the history books. They were brutal. Andrew Jackson’s wife actually died over it, they say, died of a broken heart, but she died over it. He was never quite the same.

But they say Andrew Jackson, they say Abraham Lincoln was second, but he had a, you know, in all fairness, he did have a civil war. So you would think that would cause a problem, right? So you could understand it. But nobody comes close to Trump.

Elementary school historical analysis aside, this passage is a reminder that, more than anything, Trump relishes playing the role of the Victim King. He’s casting attacks on him as attacks on his subjects, and valiantly stepping into the breach to block the slings and arrows so his loyal supporters won’t suffer. It’s part of the personalization of leadership that’s always been at the center of cults of personality — the devotional, movement-building side of authoritarianism.

The notion that the leader acts as both weapon and human shield is a central rhetorical tool in the arsenal of autocrats. And of course he’s done this better — or maybe just “more” — than anybody. More than Lincoln; more than Jackson.

Trump’s victimhood here is absolute. He’s devoted himself entirely to protecting his flock. An attack on him is an attack on them; a win for him a win for them.

We dig here more deeply into Trump’s pursuit of absolute power through his performance of weakness.

The Horst Wessel song

And you see the spirit from the hostages, and that’s what they are, is hostages. They’ve been treated terribly and very unfairly. And you know that. And everybody knows that. And we’re going to be working on that soon. The first day we get into office, we’re going to save our country, and we’re going to work with the people to treat those unbelievable patriots, and they were unbelievable patriots and are. You see the spirit, this cheering. They’re cheering while they’re doing that. And they did that in prison. And it’s a disgrace, in my opinion.

Here Trump returns the favor, in a sense, to his shock troops. The speech opened with a playback of “Justice for All,” the MAGA fundraising release by the “J6 Prison Choir” that interpolates Trump reciting the Pledge of Allegiance over a backing track of the inmates singing “The Star-Spangled Banner.”

The track is meant as a legal defense effort for the January 6 insurrectionists, but the role it plays here is to define those insurrectionists as true patriots, and to link Trump’s own persecution with that endured by his most devoted followers — the ones who’ve demonstrated their willingness to go into battle on his account. It’s a barter of martyrdoms.

This, as with the rest of the rhetoric here, is a classic authoritarian strategy. If you consider the insurrectionists cast in the role of Sturmabteilung(“SA,” the original paramilitary forces of the Nazi Party) martyr Horst Wessel (Ashli Babbitt specifically, though the group as a whole plays the same part generally here), this patriotic mashup recalls the Nazi anthem.

The Big Lie

I happen to think we won most of the country. You want to know the truth. If the voting…if the voting were real, I actually think we won most of the country.

Central to Trump’s identity is infallibility, and, given that, his mass popularity is without question. Again, this is classic autocratic positioning. Thus his obsessions with ratings, with polls, with casting primary victories that were never in doubt as fantastic triumphs.

Jokes about huge numbers aside (and the speech is rife with riffs on poll results), there is simply no way that he could have lost a legitimate electoral contest, and any such contest he might have lost would be, by definition, illegitimate. One need only look to Vladimir Putin’s “landslide” victory this week for an example of the way elections function in an authoritarian state.

The Big Lie is Trump’s truth, and it’s not just a boast. It’s key to the story he’s trying desperately to sell to the crowd, the story of a guy who can’t lose.

I was asking Jim Jordan about it because he was commenting that we have the largest crowds in the history of politics. Nobody comes close. If Ronald Reagan came to a place called Dayton, Ohio — have you heard of it? If he came to Dayton, Ohio, honestly, J.D., if he had three or 400 people in a ballroom, that would be great. We get 25-30,000 people for a small rally…We had 88,000 people show up in South Carolina.

An addendum: In his bid for recognition as the greatest of all Republicans, Trump is even willing to throw Ronald Reagan under the bus if it helps make the case.

Not even people

They’re very smart, very streetwise. And I would do the same thing. If I had prisons that were teeming with MS-13 and all sorts of people that they’ve got to take care of for the next 50 years, right? Young people, they’re in jail for years. If you call them people, I don’t know if you call them people. In some cases, they’re not people, in my opinion. But I’m not allowed to say that because the radical left says that’s a terrible thing to say…

We have so many people being hurt so badly and being killed. They’re sending their prisoners to see us. They’re sending and they’re bringing them right to the border and they’re dropping them off and we’re allowing them to come in. And these are tougher than anybody we’ve got in the country. These are hardened criminals. And we’ve got hundreds of thousands of them.

If you take Trump at his word here — and we think you should — the leaders of countries around the world are conspiring to conduct an organized invasion, deploying their criminals to the United States in order to submerge it in violence. On one level, there’s nothing here but racism and xenophobia, but this works on the level of the conspiratorial ideas of mysterious foreign threats to the body politic that have long been part and parcel of the autocrat’s appeal.

Migrants, in this account, aren’t fleeing refugees or people looking for a better life against all odds, but have been mobilized and directed against the U.S., a superhuman and yet subhuman army, “dropped off” by a shadowy cabal of foreign interests who aren’t content merely to sell us cheaper cars and fentanyl precursors.

Just insert “bankers” or “Jews” or “capitalist roaders” or even “globalists” here and you’re on the right track towards understanding what Trump’s trying to do.

Migrant crime

These are the roughest people you’ve ever seen. You know, now we have a new form of crime. I call it Biden migrant crime, but it’s too long. So let’s just call it migrant crime. We have a new category. You know, you have vicious crimes. You have violent crimes. You have all these. Now we have migrant crimes, and they’re rough. They’re rough. And it’s going to double up. And you see what’s happening.

You know, throughout the world right now, I don’t know if you know this. Crime is way, way down. You know why? Because they sent us their criminals. That’s why. It’s true. It’s true. They sent, you know, Venezuela is down 66 percent because they sent us their gang members and gangsters. They sent us their drug dealers and their murderers. They’re all coming into our country. And Venezuela now, their crime is down 66 percent.

The supposed statistics here are just a “gish gallop,” in which the speaker simply overwhelms the opponent (or in this case the audience) with a flurry of inaccurate statements, knowing that the very attempt to correct them will both derail any reasonable argument and delay a response until the time has run out.

But this, again, is the story of the alien threat, here described as entering at the behest of their domestic collaborator, Joe Biden. It’s a “stab-in-the-back” accusation (there are several in the speech), in which a leader is identified as a secret traitor, betraying the nation to foreign interests.

The truth is that crime rates are down worldwide, and these statistics are pulled out of the air. The fear people have of the loss of control of the border, and of what it means to be “American” is real, however — even if Trump’s helped in its creation — and that’s what he’s playing to so effectively.

Please open the link and continue reading this insightful exegesis of Trump’s rhetoric. He is a talented orator. So was Hitler.

Categories Bigotry, Corruption, Cruelty, Economy, Elections, Ethics, Evil, Fascism, Fraud, Ignorance, Immigration, Lies, Trump

Texas Claims Control of International Border; SCOTUS Agrees; Circuit Court Disagrees

By dianeravitch

March 20, 2024 //

Between January 2017 and January 2021, Trump stacked the federal courts with rightwing ideologues. Three were added to the U.S. Supreme Court. Many more were approved for federal District Courts and Appellate Courts. We are now seeing the results of putting extremists in charge of consequential decisions. Women’s reproductive rights, a 50-year-old precedent, were overruled and left to the states. Some have imposed bans that prevent abortions even in cases of rape, incest, and to protect the life of the mother.

In the current instance, the U.S. Supreme Court gave Texas approval to implement Senate Bill 4, a state law that takes precedence over federal law in regulating the international border with Mexico. For at least a century, federal courts have ruled that federal law governs international borders.

To complicate matters, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has issued a stay on implementation of SB 4. Decades ago, the Fifth Circuit was one of the most liberal appeals courts, and it took the lead in enforcing desegregation. It is now one of the most conservative courts.

The Washington Post described the conflicting court decisions as “whiplash”:

The law’s fate is yet another flash point in the nation’s polarized debate over immigration, which Republican candidate and former president Donald Trump has made a central theme of his campaign against Biden. Whatever the 5th Circuit decides, the status of the law is likely to end up back before the Supreme Court.
The high court’s order Tuesday afternoon set off a fast-moving round of legal maneuvering in the lower court that has kept the law’s status in limbo.

The Supreme Court urged the 5th Circuit to decide quickly whether the law would remain in effect while litigation continues, and hours later a three-judge panel said it would convene a hearing by Zoom on Wednesday morning.
Then, in a highly unusual move, just after 11 p.m. Tuesday, two of the judges on the 5th Circuit panel blocked enforcement of the law in advance of the Wednesday hearing.

The brief order did not explain the reasoning of the two judges — Priscilla Richman, a nominee of George W. Bush, and Irma Carrillo Ramirez, a Biden nominee. The dissenting judge — Andrew Oldham, a Trump nominee — said only that he would have allowed the law to remain in effect before Wednesday’s hearing.

“It’s Ping-Pong,” Efrén C. Olivares, director of strategic litigation and advocacy at the Southern Poverty Law Center, said in a phone interview, describing the back-and-forth rulings.

Olivares said it is unclear whether the three-judge panel will rule immediately, since a preliminary injunction from a lower court remains in place, and the state law is not in effect. Texas conceivably could ask the full circuit court to review the panel’s decision blocking the law temporarily, he said, but he noted that is uncommon.

The law makes it a state crime for migrants to illegally cross the border and gives Texas officials the ability to carry out their own deportations to Mexico.

How they will do so remains unclear. The Mexican government said Tuesday that it would not accept anyone sent back by Texas and condemned the law as “encouraging the separation of families, discrimination and racial profiling that violate the human rights of the migrant community.”

Mexico President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador on Wednesday referred to the Texas law as Draconian.

“It disrespects human rights, it’s a completely dehumanizing law, it’s anti-Christian, unjust, it violates precepts and norms of human co-existence, Lopez Obrador said. “It doesn’t just violate international law but [the teachings of] the Bible. I say this because those who are applying these unjust, inhumane measures go to church, they forget that the Bible talks about treating the foreigner well, and of course, loving your neighbor.”

The Texas law was passed last year as part of Republican Gov. Greg Abbott’s push to expand the state’s role in immigration enforcement — historically the purview of the federal government and its jurisdiction over international borders.

The Supreme Court’s decision drew dissent from the three liberal justices, two of whom said the majority was inviting “further chaos and crisis in immigration enforcement.”

“This law will disrupt sensitive foreign relations, frustrate the protection of individuals fleeing persecution, hamper active federal enforcement efforts, undermine federal agencies’ ability to detect and monitor imminent security threats, and deter noncitizens from reporting abuse or trafficking,” wrote Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson…

Luis Miranda, a spokesman for the Department of Homeland Security, said federal immigration agencies do not have the authority to assist Texas with the implementation of the state law. The only deportations that U.S. agents are allowed to conduct must involve federal orders, he said.

“Immigration is within the exclusive purview of the federal government,” Miranda said in a statement.

U.S. District Court judge David A. Ezra temporarily blocked the Texas law last month, saying it was probably unconstitutional and “could open the door to each state passing its own version of immigration laws.” Ezra said the law intruded into federal matters even more than an Arizona immigration law that the Supreme Court partially struck down in 2012.

But the 5th Circuit quickly froze Ezra’s decision without explanation and said the Texas law could be enforced, at least temporarily, unless the Supreme Court weighed in.

The Supreme Court did weigh in, allowing Texas to control the border. And a panel of 5th Circuit judges froze the law’s implementation.

Think about it. The U.S. Supreme Court recently decided that one state (Colorado) couldn’t disqualify an oath-breaking insurrectionist because each state would write its own rules. Now the SCOTUS allows one state to control its international border. This makes no sense.

Here is some additional background.

LoneStarLeft, a Texas blogger named Michelle Davis, was horrified by the SCOTUS approval of SB 4. She wrote yesterday:

Today, the Supreme Court ended the pause on SB 4’s implementation and allowed this blatantly unconstitutional law to be enforced while litigated in court. This ruling does not indicate that the law is constitutional; only Texas can implement it while it is being challenged. This is terrible news for many of Texas’ residents.

SB4 would grant Texas Law Enforcement Officers the authority to deport undocumented immigrants independently, bypassing due process and federal oversight. This move by Texas Republicans aims for quick political gains. The bill would allow officers and state agencies to escort individuals to ports of entry to guarantee adherence. Should immigrants resist compliance with a directive to return, they could be accused of a second-degree felony, risking up to 20 years of incarceration.

Watch Representative Jolanda Jone (D-Harris County) blast this SB4 as it went through the House:

…Now, under Texas law, any Keystone Cop can decide to drive a person they deem undocumented to the international border and demand they go back into Mexico (even if they are not from Mexico). If the person doesn’t walk across the bridge, they are arrested and imprisoned for up to twenty years.

The Constitution of the United States of America states that the Federal Government’s job is to manage international treaties, our borders, and citizenship issues. SB4 crosses a major line.

Here is a statement put out today by the Mexican Government:

This bill will even remove people who have been here for decades, living lawfully and paying taxes.

Within SB4, the term “alien” is defined as an individual who is neither a citizen nor a lawful permanent resident. Thus, a person who was once denied a visa but presently holds a valid visa (for example, tourism or marriage) is STILL considered committing an offense, even though they are lawfully present in the country.

Cruelty is the point.

SB4 passed straight down party lines. Every single Republican voted for it, and every single Democrat voted against it. When they tell you who they are, you need to listen. A lot of non-voters need to become voters, the GOP’s authoritarian laws are on our door step…

ALL Latinos should be very concerned right now.

This immigration law will allow any brown person to be rounded up for any possible violation. SB4 will allow any law enforcement agent in Texas (even school resource officers) the ability to demand a brown person prove they are a citizen (“Show Me Your Papers”). If that person can’t prove their citizenship, they risk deportation to Mexico, no matter their origin.

The law’s implementation will lead to racial profiling, separate families, and harm Black and brown communities across the state, regardless of immigration status.

That directly conflicts with the United States Constitution, which states that everyone, regardless of race or immigration status, has the freedom to move and thrive.

Republicans have already committed to opening up shuttered prisons to make room for 80,000 immigration prisoners. Under SB4, police will act as immigration agents and arrest people who “look” like they’re undocumented. Half of Texans are Latino and could “look” undocumented to a racist cop.

Categories Extremism, Immigration, Justice, Texas

Trump Predicts a “Bloodbath” if He Loses, Refers to Immigrants as “Not People,” “Animals”

By dianeravitch

March 17, 2024 //

Donald Trump is unhinged. He is running in desperation to stay out of prison. His desperation leads him to be insulting and vulgar towards anyone who stands in his way.

The New York Times reported on his latest speech, in Ohio:

Former President Donald J. Trump, at an event on Saturday ostensibly meant to boost his preferred candidate in Ohio’s Republican Senate primary race, gave a freewheeling speech in which he used dehumanizing language to describe immigrants, maintained a steady stream of insults and vulgarities and predicted that the United States would never have another election if he did not win in November.

With his general-election matchup against President Biden in clear view, Mr. Trump once more doubled down on the doomsday vision of the country that has animated his third presidential campaign and energized his base during the Republican primary.

The dark view resurfaced throughout his speech. While discussing the U.S. economy and its auto industry, Mr. Trump promised to place tariffs on cars manufactured abroad if he won in November. He added: “Now, if I don’t get elected, it’s going to be a blood bath for the whole — that’s going to be the least of it. It’s going to be a blood bath for the country.”

For nearly 90 minutes outside the Dayton International Airport in Vandalia, Ohio, Mr. Trump delivered a discursive speech, replete with attacks and caustic rhetoric. He noted several times that he was having difficulty reading the teleprompter.

The former president opened his speech by praising the people serving sentences in connection with the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the Capitol. Mr. Trump, who faces criminal charges tied to his efforts to overturn his election loss, called them “hostages” and “unbelievable patriots,” commended their spirit and vowed to help them if elected in November. He also repeated his false claims that the 2020 election was stolen, which have been discredited by a mountain of evidence.

If he did not win this year’s presidential election, Mr. Trump said, “I don’t think you’re going to have another election, or certainly not an election that’s meaningful.”

Mr. Trump also stoked fears about the influx of migrants coming into the United States at the southern border. As he did during his successful campaign in 2016, Mr. Trump used incendiary and dehumanizing language to cast many migrants as threats to American citizens.

He asserted, without evidence, that other countries were emptying their prisons of “young people” and sending them across the border. “I don’t know if you call them ‘people,’ in some cases,” he said. “They’re not people, in my opinion.” He later referred to them as “animals.”

Categories Elections, Immigration, Trump

Chris Tomlinson: Houston’s Economy Needs Immigrants

By dianeravitch

March 10, 2024 //

Chris Tomlinson is a regular opinion writer for The Houston Chronicle. I tuned in to a zoom with him yesterday and learned that he is known for his fierce independence. I signed up for his column and discovered his thoughts about “the immigration crisis,” which Americans tell pollsters these days is the most serious problem facing the nation. Tomlinson thinks both parties have failed to tell the truth, so he did. Trump, in particular, has demagogued the issue with his fear-mongering.

Tomlinson writes:

The two-ring presidential circus performed along Texas’ border on Thursday, injecting cash into the local economy but adding little to the national debate over one of the year’s most consequential issues.

President Joe Biden met with local officials in Brownsville and blamed Republicans in Congress for blocking new border security spending for political advantage. He correctly stated the broken asylum system encourages desperate people to gamble their life savings for a chance to live in the United States.

“If they get by the first day, they’ve got another five, seven, eight years before they have to do anything because they know (the immigration courts) cannot handle the caseloads quickly, and they’ll be able to stay in this country,” Biden said.

“With the new policies in this bill and the addition of 4,300 additional asylum officers, we’ll be able to reduce that process to less than six months,” he added.

Former President Donald Trump paraded before U.S. flags and uniformed National Guard troops in Eagle Pass. He renewed themes popularized by the Ku Klux Klan a century ago, sowing fear of foreigners and painting his opponent as a friend of dark-skinned criminals.

“They’re coming from jails, and they’re coming from prisons, and they’re coming from mental institutions and they’re coming from insane asylums. And they’re terrorists. They’re being let into our, our country,” Trump said in a rambling, bigoted speech. “It’s not just South America. It’s all over the world. The Congo, very big population coming in from jails from the Congo.”

Immigration is the most critical problem facing the nation, Americans told a recent Gallup poll. The issue was top of mind for 57% of Republicans, 22% of independents and 10% of Democrats.

“A separate question in the survey finds a record-high 55% of U.S. adults, up eight points from last year, saying that ‘large numbers of immigrants entering the United States illegally’ is a critical threat to U.S. vital interests,” Gallup added.

Most voters believe Trump would do a better job on border security, while only 28% of Americans approve of Biden’s immigration policies. Biden is in deep trouble, with only a 38% approval rating and a base already angry over his Middle East policies.

Anyone who’s spent time along the border will tell you most Americans don’t understand what goes on there. For example, asylum seekers are not invading the country; they turn themselves in as quickly as possible. Most of the $29 billion worth of drugs smuggled into the United States crosses at commercial entry points, which are the arterial roads keeping our economy going.

Migrants, documented or not, are critical for our workforce and society. I know people like to draw distinctions between documented and undocumented migrants, but both contribute more to the United States economy than they take. Most undocumented workers would happily pay a fine to get right with the government.

In Houston, immigrants make up almost a quarter of the population and 31% of the workforce, U.S. census data analyzed by the American Immigration Council, the Texas Association of Business and the Center for Houston’s Future found. Immigrants in the Houston statistical area earned $66.5 billion and paid $11.1 billion in federal taxes.

If Trump rounded these people up and deported them, as he promised, the construction, hospitality and hospital services would collapse.

Houston is home to more than 572,000 undocumented migrants whose households earned $13 billion in 2021. Most have fake documents and paid $794.8 million in federal taxes and $595.6 million in state and local taxes, the U.S. Congressional Budget Office reported.

Meanwhile, Biden must come up with a new approach to processing asylum seekers after Congress made it clear they will not help. But he must overcome opposition from within his party and federal courts.

Federal and international law requires the United States to grant asylum to anyone with a well-founded fear of persecution. However, establishing which claims meet that high standard under current policies can take years.

Opinions differ on what he can do without new laws. Seventy-seven Democratic lawmakers sent Biden a letter in January objecting to the deal he offered Republicans. A federal judge in San Diego has forbidden authorities from separating families at the border, and an earlier ruling limits how long Immigration and Customs Enforcement can detain families with children.

Trump’s speech on Thursday was craven but likely effective. Biden’s blame-shifting onto Republicans in Congress is disingenuous and ineffective.

While the campaigns play political games, though, people suffer, something too many overlook.

Award-winning opinion writer Chris Tomlinson writes commentary about money, politics and life in Texas. Sign up for his “Tomlinson’s Take” newsletter at houstonhchronicle.com/tomlinsonnewsletter or expressnews.com/tomlinsonnewsletter.

[Note from Diane: I added the bold emphasis.]

Categories Bigotry, Economy, Elections, Extremism, Houston, Immigration, Propaganda, Texas