A few of our stories and columns are now in front of the paywall. We at The Chief remain committed to independent reporting on labor and civil service. It's been our mission since 1897. You can have a hand in ensuring that our reporting remains relevant in the decades to come. Consider supporting The Chief, which you can do for as little as $3.20 a month.
To the editor:
We’ve all heard the MAGA explanation of why Donald Trump was returned to office - Joe Biden lost control of the border and allowed record levels of illegal immigration.
I think it is time to present a more clear-eyed assessment; Trump returned to office because he offered a series of lies to voters pre-disposed to believing the worst regarding immigrants.
Lie #1: America is being invaded. As numerous judges ruled in 2025, invasions consist of armed military forces under centralized control, not disparate families seeking asylum and/or escaping poverty and violence. The last significant invasion threat the U.S. faced was by British forces in 1812.
Lie #2: Immigrants are violent criminals, gang members and mentality ill. A leaked internal DHS document shows that fewer than 14 percent of the 400,000 immigrants detained since Trump took office have violent criminal records. Less than 2 percent belong to gangs and nearly 40 percent never even received a traffic summons.
Lie #3: Immigrants vote illegally. Several high profile GOP-led efforts to uncover “voter fraud” involving undocumented immigrants have found ZERO evidence in both the 2016 and 2020 elections.
Lie #4: Immigrants are a burden on taxpayers. The ultra-conservative CATO Institute just released a study debunking this Trump lie, finding that “each year from 1994 to 2023, the US immigrant population generated more in taxes than they received in benefits from all levels of government” resulting in “a cumulative fiscal surplus of $14.5 trillion”.
Lie #5: Immigrants will replace or destroy western culture. No immigrant wants to recreate the country they fled. They come here specifically to enjoy America’s culture and its principles – freedom, equality and justice.
Last, but not least lies #6 & #7: Trump purposefully inflated undocumented numbers by 10 million AND they didn’t eat their neighbors’ cats and dogs.
Joseph Cannisi
20 comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here
Valete
Paragraph one nails it!
The rest of the letter reiterates the same old and tired storyline.
Hello! Illegal immigration is illegal, and a country that fails to manage its borders is not a true country.
All immigrants seeking entry into the U.S. must comply with immigration laws or be repatriated.
Disregarding immigration law has repercussions.
Illegal immigration undermines the integrity of our legal system; it is unacceptable!
Thursday, February 19 Report this
fcannisi
I'm not sure why I bother, but:
Undocumented entry into the U.S. or overstaying a visa is a CIVIL offense under law punishable by a fine - it's NOT a criminal offense punishable by deportation. Asylum seeking is legal and protected under U.S. law and requires that the government provide a hearing to determine the merits.
Denying court hearings, expedited deportations, extended detentions and failure to provide due process and access to legal counsel are what undermine the integrity of our legal system.
If Word Man wishes to be taken seriously, he needs to stop parroting Trump talking points and address the specifics of the letters he takes issue with. Simply dismissing what he can't refute as "the same old tired storyline" is nothing more than a deflection and only proves that he knows his positions are indefensible.
Thursday, February 19 Report this
krell1349
Let's not forget the rest of the letter. Trump lied to get in, big lies.
Friday, February 20 Report this
Valete
( Is Illegal Immigration a Violation of Federal Law? )
“ Yes, “ illegal immigration is a violation of federal law !
1. Criminal Violations
Acts of illegal immigration are classified as federal crimes under Title 8 of the U.S. Code:
Improper Entry (8 U.S.C. § 1325)
It is a federal crime to enter or attempt to enter the U.S. at any time or place other than those designated by immigration officers, to elude examination, or to enter through fraud or willful misrepresentation.
First offense
A misdemeanor, punishable by up to six months in prison and fines.
Subsequent offenses
A felony, punishable by up to two years in prison.
Unlawful Re-entry (8 U.S.C. § 1326)
It is a federal felony for an individual who has been previously deported or removed to re-enter or be found in the U.S. without authorization.
( This can carry a sentence of up to 20 years if the individual has prior convictions for certain serious crimes.)
That’s All Folks!
Friday, February 20 Report this
Valete
Since we’re on the topic of illegal immigration, it is befitting to debate the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act, SAVE Act, which passed on a party-line vote in the House of Representatives last week.
A lone Democrat, Rep. Henry Cuellar (Texas), joined House Republicans in voting for the legislation. The rest of the House Democrats voted against the bill. Hmm!
The SAVE Act would require individuals to provide documentary proof of U.S. citizenship when registering to vote in federal elections, and to present a valid photo identification before casting a ballot. Moreover, instead of states automatically sending vote-by-mail ballots to every voter on their voter rolls, a registered voter must request a vote-by-mail ballot. And the bill requires states to purge their voter rolls every 30 days. This means states must keep their voter rolls up to date and remove all non-citizens, non-residents, and dead persons from their official lists of registered voters. This provision is designed to prevent vote-by-mail ballots being sent to ineligible voters and, potentially, being cast by unscrupulous political operatives.
“ Voting should be at least as rigorous as registering a car in a new state. “
Countries that require voter ID:
Germany
Italy
Switzerland
Ireland
India
Israel
Austria
Belgium
Denmark
Netherlands
Norway
Portugal
Spain
Sweden
Poland
Czech Republic
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Italy
Luxembourg
India
Israel
Japan
S Korea
Indonesia
Malaysia
Philippines
Thailand
Singapore
Pakistan
Japan
Russia
England (most elections)
Argentina
Brazil
Chile
Colombia
Peru
Ecuador
Uruguay
Paraguay
Bolivia
and last but not least( Mexico) .
Friday, February 20 Report this
Valete
I could poke holes into your entire letter, but I will focus on Lie #1,
paragraph #3.
Lie #1, Paragraph #3, America is being invaded.
As numerous judges ruled in 2025, invasions consist of armed military forces under centralized control, not disparate families seeking asylum and/or escaping poverty and violence. The last significant invasion threat the U.S. faced was by British forces in 1812.
Rebuttal
“ Can a country be under invasion if the invaders are not carrying weapons?”
Yes!
A country can be invaded, subdued, or have its sovereignty eroded through numerous means that do not involve foreign troops physically carrying weapons across a border.
Demographic and Cultural Infiltration
Subtle, long-term methods to change the makeup or identity of a country:
Engineered Migration: Actively facilitating massive, sudden influxes of people across borders to overwhelm social services, cause social friction, and destabilize the government.
Cultural Erosion: Using media and educational influence to diminish national identity and loyalty to the state.
In conclusion, these methods are often combined into what is known as hybrid warfare or "gray zone" conflict, which intentionally blurs the lines between peace and war to avoid triggering traditional military responses.
( As you can see, you are wrong again! )
Friday, February 20 Report this
fcannisi
There's only one reason the GOP is pushing the SAVE Act, polls are consistently showing that the American people are sick and tired of Trump and the House and possibly the Senate is likely to switch to the Democrats. The only way the GOP can maintain the majority is by cheating - gerrymandering, purging eligible voters from the rolls, closing polling sites, etc.
Every single GOP effort to uncover fraud either found nothing or ended in a charge against a Republican. When state Republicans in Arizona audited the 2020 results in Mariposa county they found that Biden won by 360 votes more than the 10,400 reported in the official tally.
The SAVE Act will never pass in the Senate. That's why Trump thinks he can sign a non-binding, illegal E.O. mandating voter id.
Friday, February 20 Report this
fcannisi
A conservative estimate calculated that the SAVE Act would disenfranchise more than 21 million American citizens with the highest impacts among college students, members of the military, Blacks and the elderly. Every bipartisan voter watchdog group, including the League of Women Voters has condemned the Act.
Friday, February 20 Report this
Valete
Wrong Again!
The SAVE Act and Election Security
The SAVE Act, which stands for Securing America's Votes through Election Technology, aims to enhance the security and integrity of U.S. elections. It includes several key provisions and objectives that work towards this goal.
Key Provisions of the SAVE Act
Mandatory Use of Paper Ballots: The act requires that all voting systems use paper ballots, which can be audited, thereby increasing the ability to verify election results.
Risk-Limiting Audits: It mandates post-election audits for federal elections, ensuring that the results can be verified against the ballots cast.
Funding for Upgrades: The SAVE Act provides financial support to states for upgrading outdated voting systems and implementing more secure technology.
Cybersecurity Protocols: It encourages states to adopt enhanced cybersecurity measures for election infrastructure, including systems and networks.
Expected Impact on Election Security
The SAVE Act is designed to address vulnerabilities in existing electoral systems by:
Enhancing Transparency: With verified paper trails, electronic voting becomes more transparent and trustworthy.
Improving Resilience: Upgraded systems are less susceptible to hacking and technical failures, creating a more resilient electoral process.
Increasing Public Confidence: By implementing robust auditing and verification measures, the act aims to bolster public trust in the electoral process.
Conclusion
In summary, the SAVE Act is indeed a legislative effort directed at making elections more secure through a combination of technology upgrades, secured voting methods, and enhanced auditing practices.
( The SAVE Act is aimed at safeguarding the integrity of elections in the United States.)
Wrong Again!
The SAVE Act and Election Security
The SAVE Act, which stands for Securing America's Votes through Election Technology, aims to enhance the security and integrity of U.S. elections. It includes several key provisions and objectives that work towards this goal.
Key Provisions of the SAVE Act
Mandatory Use of Paper Ballots: The act requires that all voting systems use paper ballots, which can be audited, thereby increasing the ability to verify election results.
Risk-Limiting Audits: It mandates post-election audits for federal elections, ensuring that the results can be verified against the ballots cast.
Funding for Upgrades: The SAVE Act provides financial support to states for upgrading outdated voting systems and implementing more secure technology.
Cybersecurity Protocols: It encourages states to adopt enhanced cybersecurity measures for election infrastructure, including systems and networks.
Expected Impact on Election Security
The SAVE Act is designed to address vulnerabilities in existing electoral systems by:
Enhancing Transparency: With verified paper trails, electronic voting becomes more transparent and trustworthy.
Improving Resilience: Upgraded systems are less susceptible to hacking and technical failures, creating a more resilient electoral process.
Increasing Public Confidence: By implementing robust auditing and verification measures, the act aims to bolster public trust in the electoral process.
Conclusion
In summary, the SAVE Act is indeed a legislative effort directed at making elections more secure through a combination of technology upgrades, secured voting methods, and enhanced auditing practices.
(The SAVE Act is aimed at safeguarding the integrity of elections in the United States.)
If you have a problem with SAVE Act, you have a problem with ensuring the integrity of elections, period!
Friday, February 20 Report this
Valete
Reread my post in regard to countries that require voter ID to vote.
( To reiterate, Mexico mandates the use of voter ID for voting.)
Friday, February 20 Report this
fcannisi
More long-winded nonsense from Word Man - his forte. Apparently, he believes he knows the law better than the multitude of federal judges that ruled that Trump's claims of invasion were false.
This included Trump-appointed Judge Fernando Rodriquez Jr. who rejected Trump's categorization of illegal crossings as an invasion. After carefully researching U.S. historical documents and past legal rulings, Rodriquez determined "The plain, ordinary meaning of 'invasion' was an entry into the nation's territory by a military force or an organized, armed force," Rodriguez wrote in his order on May 1, when he found the administration's use of the Alien Enemies Act "unlawful."
As for the SAVE Act, no country requires a passport or birth certificate as the only forms of ID. Driver's licenses and in some cases a utility bill with the voter's name and address id sufficient. AND, no country purges voter rolls on a monthly basis.
Last question - were immigrants eating cats and dogs? I bet Word Man believed this stupidity when Trump repeated it on a national debate stage.
Saturday, February 21 Report this
krell1349
We don't need the SAVE act. Voter fraud is infinitesimal in the US. It just doesn't happen and it's a false narrative. The Republicans will lose the House in the mid terms and that is what they are worried about. Trump is dragging them down.
Sunday, February 22 Report this
Valete
Give me a break Krell 1349, whoever you are!
Sunday, February 22 Report this
Valete
Krell 1349 and Reenroe seem to share a similar style, often presenting information that is totally inaccurate, and then expecting readers to believe it’s accurate. It’s clear that’s not the case!
Regarding the claim that undocumented immigrants eat cats and dogs, Reenroe’s version of this story is as elusive as a ghost!
Sunday, February 22 Report this
Valete
Reenroe, you’ve been wrong on every issue.
Keep the fiction stories coming, Reenroe.
False narratives and commentaries, one and all.
With a cell phone in hand and a teacup in another,
I assail your false letters and posts.
Your one-sided stories have predictable plots,
about President Trump and illegal aliens foremost,
so think before you pen false narratives;
or they will suffer untold comparatives.
Sunday, February 22 Report this
fcannisi
Word-y Man, can assail my letters to his heart's content. What he can never do is "poke a hole them" with credibility.
The one "hole" Word-y chose to "poke", an immigrant invasion, fell flat on its face as that characterization was rejected by Trump-appointed judge Rodriguez Jr., IN A COURT OF LAW, FULL STOP.
Monday, February 23 Report this
Valete
Dear Reen’roe,
It is evident that your fictional letters and posts are nothing more than propaganda!
Your feeble attempts to write engaging letters have been causing the readership to feel drowsy.
Your correspondences—past and present—are farcical, in every sense of the word.
Best regards, Woodman
Monday, February 23 Report this
wpeakes
The SAVE act is about much more than voter ID. This legislation would not only redundantly require voter ID to in order to cast a ballot, which approx. two-thirds of states already do, it would also require proof of citizenship with no clear guidance on how to accomplish this since each state administers its own elections and could conceivably have various and varying proofs they would accept. This is prohibitively expensive for many households since approx. half of all Americans don't have a passport, the primary proof of citizenship, and let's not even talk about married women who have a marriage certificate when a marriage license may be required or others who may not even live in the state where they were born or got married. This provision places an undue burden on the electorate; a sort of poll tax. Among other things, it would also require that states purge their voter rolls every 30 days (who has the staff for that??) and require that states give DHS access to their voter rolls...why?? It sure sounds to me like an attempt to federalize the voting process which is unconstitutional. Do better GOP!
Monday, February 23 Report this
Valete
Reen’roe has posted more misinformation about Judge Rodriguez’s decision, President Trump, and the Alien Enemies Act.
Believe it or not, Judge Rodriguez’s decision is not as bad as it might first appear for President Trump and for DHS’s ability to use the AEA to remove alien members of transnational criminal organizations that have become entwined with the governments of enemy nations.
First, Thursday’s decision was simply an appetizer, an amuse-bouche even, before the main course. The Supreme Court needs to provide clarity on the extent to which the AEA can be used to safeguard the nation outside of the context of a traditional military clash between the United States and another nation, and it needs to do so soon. By ruling against the government, Judge Rodriguez has likely accelerated the AEA’s journey to SCOTUS.
Second, Judge Rodriguez’s decision i actually gives President Trump important victories.
1) whether the depredations committed on American soil by Tren de Aragua (TdA), the Venezuelan cartel designated a significant transnational criminal organization by the Biden administration and a foreign terrorist organization by the Trump administration, constitute the acts of the Venezuelan government.
2) whether the federal judiciary should take it upon itself to question the veracity of President Trump’s factual determinations underlying his designation of Venezuela as an enemy nation under the AEA.
3) Judge Rodriguez inexplicably fumbled the ball on the one-yard line by concluding that TdA’s criminal acts in the U.S. do not constitute a predatory incursion under the AEA: to paraphrase ABBA, there must have been something in the air that night you wrote your decision, Fernando.
( Your misguided assessment was based on the misunderstanding of the term “predatory incursion” at the time of our nation’s founding.)
However, the AEA’s future will still be bright should a higher court reject his linguistic misanalysis and conclude that TdA’s acts do indeed constitute a predatory incursion while at the same time adopting his otherwise powerful legal analysis.
It is evident that Reenroe’s correspondents lack factual information.
Reenroe’s misinformation is derived from his inability to ascertain key facts.
Monday, February 23 Report this
Valete
Mr. Speaks, I value your commentary regarding the SAVE America Act!
But what’s perplexing to me is that the vast majority of developed nations already require voter ID, while the United States does not
Only U.S. citizens should vote in U.S. federal elections. Requiring proof of identification to cast a ballot in a federal election should not be controversial. It’s common sense.
In my opinion, Congress must take immediate action and pass the SAVE America Act to ensure the integrity of elections.
Monday, February 23 Report this