Consider the Source

Important tips for both writers and readers on illegal immigration and other subjects

Good Easter Monday morning! He is risen! I hope you had a joyous Easter Sunday.

Before Holy Week I mentioned that I decided to show some mercy and delay a post or two until after Easter Sunday. Well, Lent and Holy Week actually rubbed off on me. I decided further merciful restraint is the better way to go on one of the planned posts, on a church communication on immigration. I was going to identify the church body and the church individual and torment them in Christian love. Instead I will not but instead use portions of what they sent out to illustrate the importance of care in choosing one’s sources in communications. And I will privately share this post with the responsible parties. If they learn along with you receptive readers, then so much the better. I will also note the importance of readers being alert to sources.

I understand if some readers would rather I expose the origin of the communication. But please respect my decision here. Do not attempt to reveal the origin in the comments. I will delete any such comments. Of course, I have no control over people attempting to reveal things on their own platforms, but I have made my decision. Please respect it.

This church communication on immigration policy early on revealed a major source — and credit to the writer for transparency — a report by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops and World Relief.

Alarm bells may be already going off for those aware of some of the mechanics of the Invasion into the United States under Biden. The USCCP and World Relief were major enablers of “migrants” and “refugees” entering the U. S. And the USCCP and World Relief were paid very well by the Biden Regime to assist the invaders, to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars.

So citing these groups as a source on illegal immigration and its effects is a bit like citing drug cartels for information on how drug and human trafficking affects the United States. (And, by the way, drug cartels were very much involved in the Invasion. They, too, made a lot of money off of it.)

And let’s dispense with the half-truth, also in this communication, that the Invasion was legal because the Biden Regime said it was and invented mechanisms for letting in the millions. Biden and those pulling his strings willfully did not enforce immigration law in letting the millions in. At best, they abused law concerning asylum to evade the rest of immigration law. (And asylum procedures were evaded as well. They were reduced to little more than a wave through.) To say the Invasion was legal is like saying my driving 100 down the highway* is legal because the highway patrolman I sped past was taking a nap or just decided not to pursue me or just wanted to end his shift so he gave me a warning and let me go.**

Later in the communication is another interesting source, though it is not explicitly mentioned. There is the assertion that 73.6% of those arrested by ICE nationwide have no criminal convictions. Assuming that is accurate — and I do not so assume — that actually undermines the argument. With few exceptions, which are usually quickly remedied, all arrested by ICE should not be in the country in the first place. If over a quarter of those arrested have also been convicted of further crimes, then I’m glad these arrests are made! And no telling how many of the 73.6% have committed further crimes but just have not been convicted in court yet.

There is another way that assertion undermines the communication. If one clicks on the link for the assertion, one is sent to TRAC Reports. Click a little more on that site, and you find out this about TRAC:

TRAC’s work has been supported by numerous foundations such as the Rockefeller Family Fund, the New York Times Company Foundation, the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation, the Carnegie Corporation of New York, Ford Foundation, JEHT Foundation, the Evelyn and Walter Haas, Jr. Fund, the Beldon Fund, The Herb Block Foundation, and the Open Society Foundation. It has a partnership agreement to provide data and expertise on asylum to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR).

And note that not all the sources of TRAC’s funding are listed. But those mentioned there are quite a collection of bad actors, including the Rockefellers and the Open Society Foundation of, yes, the Soros family.

That should alert both the writer and readers of the communication that TRAC is not to be trusted as a source. But even if the information presented is accurate (which again I seriously doubt), it undermines credibility to use such a source.

Let’s flip it. If Candace Owens manages to say something sensible and accurate, I am still not going to cite her as a source. For she is not credible, and it would undermine my credibility to cite her. Not to mention I do not want to promote her in any way.

That said, there may be a time when I cite a source that is often unreliable to make a point that even Mr. X agrees with me. I might cite a commission on elections that Jimmy Carter led years ago because it concluded that mail-in voting facilitates election fraud. For President Carter is both well thought of and of a political bent that one would not expect him to oppose mass mail-in voting. So it is notable that his commission opposed overuse of mail-in voting, and I do feel free to note it.

But that is not what is happening here with TRAC and its backers. It is fair to say Soros and Co. are not well thought of among decent people, and they are bad actors, to put it mildly. It is unwise for a writer to cite groups aligned with Soros. And once readers become aware Soros is behind information, likely disinformation, they should not trust the supposed information.

Now, to be fair, the writer of the church communication may not have been aware that one of his sources was Soros aligned and funded. Talented man that I am, I discovered the Soros connection quickly. But such items are easy to miss, and I’ve made my share of errors as well through the years. So be careful out there.

To confess an error (or two or . . . ) on, say, X it does happen that I “like” or even repost an item only to find out later it was not entirely accurate. That may happen even to some of you on social media. When that happens, I undo any likes. And if I have reason to believe the source is habitually or even intentionally inaccurate, I unfollow it and do not use it as a source again. I might even block it if I think the inaccuracy is intentional. And, yes, these inaccurate sources can be on the Right. There are people who post crap for clicks across the political spectrum. Grifters are everywhere! I used to be naive about that. I’m much less so now. Do learn from my mistakes.

This begs the question of how typical readers can gain the ability to detect questionable sources. I oft tell of how the Secret Service trains people to detect counterfeit currency (at least in years past). They first get trainees very familiar with real currency. That way, when they come across a fake bill, it immediately looks off to them. Becoming familiar with a broad subject, be it illegal immigration or some other subject, increases the ability to notice if an assertion or a source is off.

Of course for most that begs the further question of how to become informed on a broad subject when one has limited time. It so happens I just finished a book that I find very helpful on the subject of both illegal and some forms of legal immigration into the U. S. — The Invisible Coup by Peter Schweizer. The book focuses on how foreign actors and domestic collaborators have gamed weaknesses in U. S. immigration policy and logistics to undermine the United States. It is exceedingly well documented with sixty pages devoted to the footnotes and index. Better known for Clinton Cash, Schweizer excels at documenting the facts without excess vitriol. (So he’s not a hot head like yours truly.)

The Invisible Coup covers a lot of ground but it is not a hard nor a long read. At the same time, I learned a lot reading it although I already knew too much in this area. For example, how China games our ridiculous policy of birthright citizenship through numerous birth tourism companies is an eye opener. Also I was unaware of how blatantly Mexico interferes in our domestic politics and immigration policy and how Nicaragua became a conduit for the Invasion.

Some readers may also have copies of Megan Basham’s Shepherds for Sale, which I reviewed in 2024. She also excels at keeping receipts. Her chapter on illegal immigration, focusing on how evangelical leaders and bodies became tools for the Invasion, is also helpful. That chapter would be a good supplement to The Invisible Coup.

I could ramble on. But in short, it is important, particularly for those writing for a church or other Christian body, to take care what sources one uses. And readers do well to be alert about the sources of what they read. That goes double for the subject of immigration.

——

*I do not drive 100 down the highway. Now once or twice when I was young and foolish . . . .

**Also I should clarify that my analogy is far from perfect. Border Patrol officers want to enforce immigration law and defend the United States. They were frustrated by Biden policies keeping them from so doing. The blame belongs with the Biden Regime and backers, not with Border Patrol officers. And I salute them and their good service.