In this episode, Lisa interviews Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, about U.S. immigration policy. They discuss the effectiveness of Trump-era enforcement measures, the concept of self-deportation, and the economic impact of illegal immigration. Krikorian critiques current policies, emphasizing the importance of national sovereignty and the need for practical reforms like mandatory e-verify. The Truth with Lisa Boothe is part of the Clay Travis & Buck Sexton Podcast Network - new episodes debut every Tuesday & Thursday.
To learn more about Mark CLICK HERE
Follow Clay & Buck on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/clayandbuck
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Welcome to the Truth with Lisa Booth, where we cut
through the noise to try to get to the heart
of the issues that matter to you. So today we're
tackling the immigration firestorm head on. Did you know that
there's an estimated fifteen point four million illegal aliens in
the United States?
Speaker 2 (00:20):
So what do we do about them?
Speaker 1 (00:22):
President trumpson pushing for self deportation.
Speaker 2 (00:24):
It's working.
Speaker 1 (00:25):
He's been cracking down on sanctuary cities and the stakes
really couldn't be higher. So today we're going to have
Mark Krekorian on the show. He's the executive director of
the Center for Immigration Studies, to unpack the latest moves
from workplace raids to travel bands and so much more.
So get ready to dive into the truth and to
get some answers on what we're supposed to do about
(00:48):
fifteen point four million illegal aliens. Stay tuned for Mark Crekorian. Well, Mark,
it's great to have you on the show again. Obvious
since the last time I've had you on, everything's changed.
President Trump won reelection and basically the border's been shut down.
Speaker 2 (01:09):
If you kind of.
Speaker 1 (01:10):
Had to assess sort of like what grade would you
give the president so far in his immigration efforts. How
is the Trump administration doing so far?
Speaker 3 (01:18):
I give the president an a minus on immigration, and
the minus is only really because there's there are things
that they need to get moving on, like new personnel
that have been slow to get appointed or confirmed by
the Senate. But what they've done so far is outstanding.
The first job, of course, is they have to shut
(01:38):
the border down, and that happened like right away. It
didn't take new laws, as the Biden people and the
Democrats in Congress had insisted. It just took a new president.
And it wasn't just a matter of a kind of
immediate drop because smugglers were afraid of the bad Orange Man.
(02:01):
It's persisted for months and so in fact, recently the
Tom Homan the Immigrations are where the borders are announced
that there was a night, an entire day where only
something like ninety five people attempted to cross the entire
(02:23):
two thousand mile border, and that no one, not a
single person, had been released by the border patrol. So
you know, it's not as though illegal immigration across the
border is now zero and never going to come back.
It's a challenge that's always going to remain. But boy,
is it under control in a way that we've never
(02:43):
seen before, not even in the sixties when the numbers
were a lot lower. I mean, it's really remarkable what
they've done at the border. The second challenge, and the
bigger one, is trying to unwind the Biden administration's disaster
on immigration, and not just the illegals who came in
(03:04):
under Biden, but the illegals from before as well. And
that's where there's been significant obviously opposition, both in the
courts at the local level, but you know, they're uh,
you know, they're they're pushing back against it. They knew
there was going to be lawfair. And actually the one
(03:25):
point on lawfair, I'm happy to talk about anything you want,
but the one thing that really struck me is the
lawfair so far has been about like individual illegal aliens
or handfuls of people. So the anti borders side is
spending all of this time and effort trying to keep
(03:47):
one you know, Maryland Man illegal alien from being deported,
while the administration is rushing thousands out, you know, out
the door at the same time. So I don't think
it's a strategy on the part of the administration, but
they seem to be doing a two track thing, pursuing
(04:09):
these high profile lawsuits while for individual illegal aliens while
moving people out wholesale at the same time. So it
seems to be working pretty well. And you know, I
have high hopes for the next three and a half years.
Speaker 1 (04:25):
But Joe Biden told us that it would take Congress
and he couldn't do it alone. I love that line
from President Trump's joint address to Congress of like all
you needed is a new president. It is sort of
funny though, seeing them sort of lay down on the
sword for the Maryland man from El Salvador who you know,
allegedly beat his wife and allegedly was part of murdering
(04:49):
a rival gang mother or gang member's mother and you.
Speaker 3 (04:53):
Know, allan smuggler too.
Speaker 1 (04:56):
Humans, it just really seems to be the kind of
guy you'd want to get behind. You know what's interesting, too,
is this administration has really encouraged self deportation, and we're
finding out that it's working. And you know, they've done
so by sort of changing the CB one app and
a CB home and our cb P home or CB
home and then also offering money to try to get
(05:18):
people to self deport.
Speaker 2 (05:21):
You know, why do you think they've chosen that option?
Speaker 1 (05:24):
Just probably because it's a path of least resistance or
the messages getting out or kind of what do you
attribute that to.
Speaker 3 (05:30):
Well, there's a lot of illegal aliens and you know,
you can't take them all in the custody and remove them.
I mean, that's just it's a huge problem. And so
what you need is to is to kind of leverage
the regular enforcement that the agents are carrying out in
order to kind of you know, have a multiplier effect.
(05:52):
Because for instance, back during in the fifties, when Eisenhower
had a big illegal immigration deportation effort, they ended up
physically taking into custody and removing about one hundred thousand
illegal immigrants, but about a million people are estimated to
have left, so there was a ten to one ratio there. Likewise,
(06:18):
in after nine to eleven, there was a program called
end Seers. It's a security kind of a registration program
for foreigners from countries that were of concern for terrorism,
and Pakistanis were like the biggest number. And this program
nabbed about fifteen hundred Pakistani illegal aliens, but about fifteen
(06:42):
thousand are estimated to have high tailed it back to
Pakistan on their own self deported.
Speaker 2 (06:49):
Now.
Speaker 3 (06:49):
I don't think you're going to get a ten to
one ratio now necessarily, but it's free to the taxpayer
completely apart from this issue of you know, they're paying
these bonuses if you go home, and you know through
this CBP one or CBP home app. But people who
(07:12):
just go on their own, they sort of figure, oh
my god, I don't want to get arrested. I'm kind
of thinking about going home anyway. And so you know, Maria,
pack up the kids and we're going to head back
two steps ahead of the law. That doesn't cost us anything,
and it you know, it's a it's kind of a
it's a multiplier effect for enforcement. So it is essential
(07:36):
that you pursue a self deportation strategy, whether you call
it that or not. And the one of the reasons
that can work it's not as though, like I said,
it's not as though they they've thought up this idea
on their own. There. One of the reasons that can
work is there's always some illegal aliens leaving anyway, because
(07:57):
there's always churn in the illegal population. So the key
to attrition of the illegal population is fewer people coming
in and more people going out. I mean, it's pretty
you know, pretty basic arithmetic. And the way you get
more people to leave again, some people are always going
to be leaving. The way you get more people to
(08:18):
leave is you make clear that you're enforcing the law.
And a key point here is that self deportation cannot
work if it's just about arrest, if the enforcement side
of it it's just about arresting criminals. Because most illegal immigrants,
I mean, they've almost all committed some significant federal crimes,
(08:41):
but most of them are related to immigration, tax frauds,
social security fraud, ID fraud, that kind of stuff. As
far as violent crimes or drug dealing or what have you,
most illegal aliens don't do that stuff. They're just working
stiffs like anybody else. And if the enforcement is only
against criminals and not at work sites and what have you,
(09:03):
then you know an ordinary schmoe who's not raping anybody
and not selling drugs, we'll figure, well, he doesn't have
anything to worry about. That's why you have to do
both going after the criminals and going after regular illegal
aliens in order to get self deportation to work.
Speaker 1 (09:23):
We've got to take a quick commercial break more with
Mark on the other side. If you like what you're hearing,
please share on social media or maybe send it to
a friend. You know, it was interesting because one of
your colleagues in the New York Post wrote about the
nearly million people who are self deported, and you know,
(09:46):
an article from the Washington Post talking about how a
million foreign born workers have exited the workforce since March. However,
also noting in the article that hourly wages have accelerated
the same time.
Speaker 2 (10:02):
What message does that send you.
Speaker 1 (10:07):
That despite you know, foreign born workers leaving the exit
or exiting the workforce and being told that that's going
to weaken the labor supply, but yet hourly wages have
accelerated at the same time.
Speaker 2 (10:17):
Like what what? What message does that send you? What
do you draw from that?
Speaker 3 (10:21):
That's not a coincidence. I mean, when the labor market tightens,
then wages go up. In other words, if there are
fewer people we didn't reason obviously, but if there are
if there are fewer people for looking for jobs and
employers have to, you know, uh sort of hustle to
find workers, they're going to respond in a bunch of ways.
(10:42):
One of which is they're going to offer more money.
So it's not coincidental that the forearm some signif there's
been significant exit of foreign born workers from the workforce
and at the same time, UH wages, especially hourly wages,
have gone up. Those are actually related phenomenon. That's kind
(11:03):
of the whole point, or part of the point. And
I wish the administration we're making that argument better. Maybe
that's That's part of my reason it's a and not
a plus, is that they have this great news that
their enforcement efforts are actually bearing fruit for regular workers.
(11:25):
In other words, it's not just the you know, rapists
and what have you that they're getting out, which is
obviously beneficial for everybody. We don't want those people here
at all, nobody does. But immigration enforcement is also supposed
to help workers, ordinary workers, especially less skilled people, and
to increase their bargaining power because there's fewer people competing
(11:46):
with them, and they actually have you know, they've got
a success they can point to. And the you know,
in that announcement about the hourly about the wages increase
in wages for hourly workers, they didn't make the connection
was from the Treasury Department. I think, and so I'm
not sure one hand knows what the other is doing,
(12:07):
but they've got a victory there, and they should have
been talking about it, because part of the point of
immigration enforcement is to increase the bargaining power of less
skilled workers. Because most government policies, at least in this
economic area, immigration and a lot of others, are going
(12:29):
to have one of two effects. Either they're going to
make it easier for employers to find workers or easier
for workers to find jobs, one or the other. A
loose labor market helps employers because it means that workers
have to hustle to find jobs. A tight labor market
(12:53):
means that workers don't have to hustle to find the
jobs as much employers have to hustle to find the workers.
And you know, obviously there's a lot of moving parts
to anything, but all of the things being equal, I
think it is. And this is a normative judgment. You
could have a different conclusion, but I think that the
(13:16):
balance of kind of interests should be on making it
possible making it necessary for employers to hustle to find
workers by offering more money, different benefits, different working conditions,
whatever it is, rather than forcing workers to hustle to
find jobs.
Speaker 1 (13:37):
You know, because obviously the whole argument from the left
and some of the right as well as well, we
need these people for you know, these jobs, whether it's
in the field or what have you. And you know,
we're not going to get Americans.
Speaker 2 (13:50):
To fill these jobs.
Speaker 1 (13:53):
You know, that's always sort of the argument for you know,
pro mass immigration, right.
Speaker 3 (14:01):
Yep, yeah, it's the I even had a hashtag back
when they still use hashtags jaw d jobs Americans won't do.
And you know, there's sort of a kernel of truth there,
but not very much. The fact is that almost all
occupations that the Census Bureau tracks, because they slice and
(14:22):
dice all the jobs in the country into i don't know,
several hundred, four hundred, five hundred different occupations, and almost
all of them are majority native born, not even just
legal workers. So you include native born and legal immigrants.
The majority in almost every job category is native born.
And there's only one job category where where more than
(14:46):
sixty percent of the workers are immigrants. And again that's
not illegal, that's just any kind of immigrants, even if
the US citizens, and that's manicurists and whatever, you know,
nail people working in nail shops or whatever it. That's it.
Even in things like you know, office cleaning, janitorial work,
(15:09):
all of that stuff, the majority are native born. So
you can't say that a job where, say, even if
it's only fifty percent of the people who do it
are native born, you can't say that's a job Americans
won't do because half of the people doing the job
are Americans. The only place that argument holds any water
(15:29):
is in certain narrow farming occupations, like the harvest of
fresh fruits and vegetables, because that has become completely foreignized.
But even there, first of all, there's an unlimited guest
worker program, so we don't need illegal immigration to do that.
It's just that farmers need to follow the rules, and
(15:51):
there's rules about pay and housing and transportation, which many
farmers don't want to have to bother with. But the
other thing is many of those jobs shouldn't ex just
in a modern society. The United farm Workers puts out
a video around Thanksgiving. They lose all the time, but
they make a big push before Thanksgiving to say that,
you know, farm workers are why you have food on
(16:13):
your table, this kind of thing, and they show these
videos of people doing farm work, and they're hardworking people,
and I'm sure they're fine people doing this work. But
the one that really stuck in my mind was a
guy kneeling in the dirt, pulling radishes out by hand
and then rubber banding them in bunches and going on
(16:33):
to the next one. He was incredible dexterity, working really hard.
And why on earth is a modern society, you know,
have to feed itself by bringing in foreign workers to
kneel in the dirt and pull things out of the
ground with their hands. It's medievil And so you know,
(16:54):
mechanization can solve, if not all, almost all of these problems.
But what interest is there on the part of a
farmer to invest the money in mechanization or even a
you know, a farm equipment company from researching and building machines.
(17:15):
If you know you've got seventeen illegal aliens fighting for
each job, that's just cheaper and easier. So one of
the reasons we need enforcement is not just because you know,
illegality is bad, but also to spur mechanization, labor saving
technology and by definition, productivity increases in farming. So so no,
(17:40):
this whole job Americans won't do things a canard and
it's just a it's just an excuse. Again, you're right,
people on the left and the right, a libertarian and
corporate right at least, use to justify not enforcing immigration laws.
Speaker 1 (17:56):
Although it is sort of interesting because you would think
that people who are so pro immigrant and pro human
rights would want more protection for those workers.
Speaker 3 (18:05):
So well, it was like that, Yeah, it was like
that in the old days. Caesar Chavez, who started United
farm Workers and now is some kind of icon for
the left and for the racial chauvinists among the Hispanics,
he was a regular union guy. First of all, he
wasn't a one of these Larraza chauvinists. He thought that
(18:27):
was a racist. Actually, he explicitly said that this Larraza
thing is just the Nazi concept. He literally used that language.
But he also, in the economic sense, believed in limiting
access to the country through immigration enforcement in order to
improve the lot of the workers who were here. And
(18:51):
you know, he used to complain the border patrol ism
arresting these people and I've sent them lists of where
they are, and they won't go and arrest them because
the big employers and the politicians don't want the law,
didn't want the law enforced. So you know, we can
use a lot more Caesar Javaz, real Caesar job As
in the fields today, not the kind of fake Caesar
(19:14):
Chavez is that the lefties are retailing now.
Speaker 1 (19:19):
Well, it's interesting we've seen from President Trump recently, just
in a span of a few days, sort of this
reversal on the workplace raids, you know, particularly in agriculture
and hospitality. And on June twelfth he sort of indicated
this pause on raids like farms and hotels and restaurants,
and then by June sixteenth he reversed that guidance resuming
(19:41):
these enforcement at these work sites.
Speaker 2 (19:45):
You know, what do you.
Speaker 1 (19:46):
Think led to that sort of initial kind of like pause,
and then why do you think he's since reversed it,
and sort of what do you make of that whole ordeal.
Speaker 3 (19:56):
He was There's two things. First, he was heavy lobbied
by business interests and specifically by the Secretary of Agriculture
for Rollins, who is kind of the lobbyist for the
egg industry in the government rather than the government's representative
to the egg industry. And you know, there's the distractions
(20:17):
of the la riots and the war in the Middle East.
And the other thing is the president's businessman, and he
you know, he's used seasonal workers, and he realizes that
it is in fact a headache sometimes for businesses to
fill a lot of these jobs. And that's that's true enough,
no question, it's not a reason not to do immigration enforcement,
(20:39):
but the headache can be real. And so you put
those things together, he was like, Okay, yeah, you know,
we'll go easy on some of these employers. And like
almost instantly, he got pushback both from his base people saying, look,
this is we voted to you for you to you know,
enforce immigration laws. What do you talk about? And from
(21:02):
within the administration. I mean, this was this just led
to an explosion inside the admin. And it's to their
credit that you didn't have a lot of people leaking
to the media criticizing this. They kept the fight inside,
which is where it belongs. But they waged it. And
(21:23):
I don't know, you know, if there were people threatening
to resign high profile people if he didn't go back
on it. Again, I'm not being coy here. I really
don't know, but I suspect there may have been those
kind of threats because this is this would have been
if they stuck with it and exempted all restaurants, farms,
meat packers, and hotels from the immigration law. That would
(21:47):
have been a torpedo below the waterline for the president's
credibility on his you know, marquee issue. So the temptation
to do this was always there, and frankly will continue,
I'm afraid. But the president, I guess the way to
put it is, he passed the test. He initially failed it,
(22:11):
but it was you know, in other words, where he
caved into business concerns, but that wasn't a final decision,
and in the end he came to the right conclusion.
So you know, maybe that's another reason I'd have the
AS for the grade rather than an eight plus. But
it's still an A because they, you know, he did
(22:32):
the right thing, and they have literally just within days
said no, no, everybody's you know libeled immigration enforcement. Nobody
gets a special pass or a special exemption, and that's
the way it should be.
Speaker 2 (22:47):
Quick break more with Mark.
Speaker 1 (22:51):
You know, it's interesting because your organization, the Center for
Immigration Studies, estimates that we have about fifteen point four
million at legal aliens. I think you mentioned that before
in the conversation as well. Obviously that's a lot of people.
You know, even just that million number for self deportations
doesn't get the job done. Even the deportations that he's
trying to do, doesn't get the job done. So like,
(23:13):
what do you do about this massive illegal population?
Speaker 3 (23:18):
Well, look, it's a process, it's not an event. I mean,
the administration has only been around for what is it
four months or something a five months. You know, it's
going to take time, and the issue is not you know,
have they solved the problem today if we could, you know,
if they if they've been able to engineer a million
self deportations, you figure over the next three and a
(23:40):
half years another I don't know, that's uh five million,
Maybe people leave on their own six million, and they
actually deport another couple million or three million, I don't know.
We'll see that. You're taking a huge chunk out of
this regal immigrant legal immigration problem. So I think it's
(24:04):
too much to expect that even just in one term
they're going to solve the whole problem overnight. They're making
real progress, and so they just need to keep at it.
You keep the enforcement of physically taking people into custody
and removing them. You combine that with increasing efforts to
spur self deportation. So there's other things they need to
(24:27):
do there. For instance, we need to have Everify mandated
for all new hires. That's an online system, free online
system the government runs so that when an employer hires
somebody and submits the regular payroll information, social security and IRS,
they also go to another website. It should be integrated, frankly,
(24:49):
but maybe it will be at some point. But they
now go to another website and you just put in
their name, social and date of birth and it tells
you whether they're it matches their records. Is this person
is this person authorized to work? It's not perfect, but
it works pretty well for a government program. We've been
using it for years. The problem is it's not mandatory.
Only about half of new hires go through this system,
(25:12):
and there are ways to fool it, but it's hard,
it's not easy to fool, and it needs to be
mandatory for all new hires everywhere to have any meaning
as far as to be able to prompt and spur
more self deportation. And there's a whole bunch of other
things they need to do. For instance, it needs to
be and this is a Treasury Department thing. It needs
(25:33):
to be impossible for illegal aliens to open bank accounts.
Under Obama, they actually explicitly made it lawful to the
forms of ID you have to present. They made it
lawful to use forms of ID that only illegal aliens
bothered a cat like consular ID cards from foreign governments.
(25:54):
They need to make it increasingly difficult for illegal immigrants
to get drivers licenses, and there's a whole bunch of
other areas that they need to you know, tighten up on.
But this is they're making real progress. This is the
idea that you know, it's the problem hasn't been solved yet,
and it's you know, there's still some illegal aliens left
(26:16):
even after four years, which there will be. It doesn't
mean that they're not solving the problem. I mean, and
you know, knock on wood, if there's say a JD.
Van's administration, they would continue it. And you know, I
think we've got we actually can't solve this problem. That's
(26:37):
one of the reasons you mentioned our number fifteen something million,
and again we acknowledge that's probably almost certainly an undercount.
It's probably sixteen maybe seventeen million when you add it
all together. Again a lot of people. But that's why
I think the the idea of some people sort of
on the restrictionist side that who scoff at that number
(26:59):
as too low, and it's like, no, there's twenty five
thirty million, there's a fifty million illegal eight one hundred million.
I mean, it's ludicrous. If there really were fifty million
illegal immigrants, then I'm not sure we could solve the problem.
I mean we might have to just throw our hands
up and amnesty people and start over again. The problem
we have is big enough, but it's not too big
(27:21):
that it can't be you know, can't be solved. So
I actually think they're making good progress and we're going
in the right direction.
Speaker 2 (27:30):
Well, I'm sure too.
Speaker 1 (27:31):
It's frustrating because I feel like so much a public
policy is just common sense. Like even just executive orders
imposing travel bands from countries where we can't vet them
like that makes sense. Not letting people in on visas
who hate our country, that makes sense.
Speaker 2 (27:45):
If you secure your border, you're.
Speaker 1 (27:47):
Going to not have a legal immigration like that makes
it right?
Speaker 2 (27:50):
It like so much of this is just common sense.
Speaker 1 (27:53):
Yet you know which you know, really just indicates that
what we saw on earth the Bio administration was intentional
because it's almost too easy to solve if you really
want to.
Speaker 3 (28:03):
The intentional nature of what the Biden people did is real,
but it's not. I take issue with a lot of
our friends and allies who say, you know, they're importing
these people to import voters or to influence the census
count so they get more seats in the House in
(28:24):
twenty thirty.
Speaker 2 (28:25):
Or even that.
Speaker 3 (28:26):
Definitely, yeah, I mean those are real impact.
Speaker 2 (28:29):
Yeah, But my.
Speaker 3 (28:32):
Point is I don't think that's what the immigration people
in the administration were actually thinking. In other words, it
wasn't a strategy. They do not, did not, and still
do not believe that immigration limits are morally defensible. They
think immigration law as such is Jim Crow and therefore
(28:52):
anybody who shows up at the border has to be
let in. Period. You see what I mean, in other words,
is an ideological concern that has the benefits that I
mentioned for them. Sure, but what drove the Biden immigration people,
whether it's ma Orcist or all of the you know,
the DHS secretary or all the others, is that they
(29:13):
do not think that the American people have the right
to say no to any foreigner who wants to come in.
And once that word got out, they all started coming in.
Speaker 2 (29:25):
And before we.
Speaker 1 (29:26):
Go, I think, you know, when we see sort of
the protests in LA and you listen to Mayor Karen Bass,
it seems like basically what they're saying to your point
of what you're just saying now, like surrender your country
to legal aliens.
Speaker 2 (29:40):
And so I think at the heart.
Speaker 1 (29:41):
Of this issue is really just sovereignty, like are we
are like are we a sovereign nation or not?
Speaker 2 (29:50):
And you know, that just seems to be the crux
of the issue to me.
Speaker 3 (29:53):
Absolutely no, I mean that's that's now the a litmus
test issue on the left that they reject. They reject
American sovereignty. I mean, it's as simple as that. They're
like the Libertarians who were ostensibly still on the right
but really are now part of the left coalition. The
Cato Institute people and the rest of them are because
(30:14):
of immigration actually and this whole issue of sovereignty and
self determination, they are. They're part of the left, and
that is the key issue. This isn't about whether how
you know, some visa program works or what's the best
way to promote you know, better cooperation with law enforcement
(30:35):
or whatever it is. Those are for the left and
the libertarians. Those are secondary issues. They reject the concept
of American sovereignty over immigration. And so anybody who gets
in has a right to come in and a right
to stay if they want to. We have no right,
literally have no right to let them leave. I mean
(30:56):
to make them leave. And so that is the key
issue are we do we basically is do the American
people have a right to make laws? Can they govern?
Can we govern ourselves and make laws and enforce those laws?
And the answer not just on immigration, but immigration is
(31:16):
where you see it most in most stark contrast, the
answer of those, and this is a mainstream democratic position
now is no, American people do not have the right
to limit immigration, period and we're seeing everything else flows
from that, whether it's Los Angeles or you know, anything
else that's insane.
Speaker 1 (31:36):
Mark Krekorian, Executive director of Center for Immigration Studies. Appreciate
your time, interesting stuff.
Speaker 2 (31:42):
Thank you very much.
Speaker 3 (31:44):
Thank you.
Speaker 1 (31:44):
That was Mark Krekorian, Executive director of the Immigration Those.
Mark Krekorian, Executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies,
Appreciate him for making the time to come on the show.
Appreciate you guys at home for listening every Tuesday and Thursday,
but you can listen throughout the week.
Speaker 2 (32:00):
Next time.
Welcome to the Truth with Lisa Booth, where we cut
through the noise to try to get to the heart
of the issues that matter to you. So today we're
tackling the immigration firestorm head on. Did you know that
there's an estimated fifteen point four million illegal aliens in
the United States?
Speaker 2 (00:20):
So what do we do about them?
Speaker 1 (00:22):
President trumpson pushing for self deportation.
Speaker 2 (00:24):
It's working.
Speaker 1 (00:25):
He's been cracking down on sanctuary cities and the stakes
really couldn't be higher. So today we're going to have
Mark Krekorian on the show. He's the executive director of
the Center for Immigration Studies, to unpack the latest moves
from workplace raids to travel bands and so much more.
So get ready to dive into the truth and to
get some answers on what we're supposed to do about
(00:48):
fifteen point four million illegal aliens. Stay tuned for Mark Crekorian. Well, Mark,
it's great to have you on the show again. Obvious
since the last time I've had you on, everything's changed.
President Trump won reelection and basically the border's been shut down.
Speaker 2 (01:09):
If you kind of.
Speaker 1 (01:10):
Had to assess sort of like what grade would you
give the president so far in his immigration efforts. How
is the Trump administration doing so far?
Speaker 3 (01:18):
I give the president an a minus on immigration, and
the minus is only really because there's there are things
that they need to get moving on, like new personnel
that have been slow to get appointed or confirmed by
the Senate. But what they've done so far is outstanding.
The first job, of course, is they have to shut
(01:38):
the border down, and that happened like right away. It
didn't take new laws, as the Biden people and the
Democrats in Congress had insisted. It just took a new president.
And it wasn't just a matter of a kind of
immediate drop because smugglers were afraid of the bad Orange Man.
(02:01):
It's persisted for months and so in fact, recently the
Tom Homan the Immigrations are where the borders are announced
that there was a night, an entire day where only
something like ninety five people attempted to cross the entire
(02:23):
two thousand mile border, and that no one, not a
single person, had been released by the border patrol. So
you know, it's not as though illegal immigration across the
border is now zero and never going to come back.
It's a challenge that's always going to remain. But boy,
is it under control in a way that we've never
(02:43):
seen before, not even in the sixties when the numbers
were a lot lower. I mean, it's really remarkable what
they've done at the border. The second challenge, and the
bigger one, is trying to unwind the Biden administration's disaster
on immigration, and not just the illegals who came in
(03:04):
under Biden, but the illegals from before as well. And
that's where there's been significant obviously opposition, both in the
courts at the local level, but you know, they're uh,
you know, they're they're pushing back against it. They knew
there was going to be lawfair. And actually the one
(03:25):
point on lawfair, I'm happy to talk about anything you want,
but the one thing that really struck me is the
lawfair so far has been about like individual illegal aliens
or handfuls of people. So the anti borders side is
spending all of this time and effort trying to keep
(03:47):
one you know, Maryland Man illegal alien from being deported,
while the administration is rushing thousands out, you know, out
the door at the same time. So I don't think
it's a strategy on the part of the administration, but
they seem to be doing a two track thing, pursuing
(04:09):
these high profile lawsuits while for individual illegal aliens while
moving people out wholesale at the same time. So it
seems to be working pretty well. And you know, I
have high hopes for the next three and a half years.
Speaker 1 (04:25):
But Joe Biden told us that it would take Congress
and he couldn't do it alone. I love that line
from President Trump's joint address to Congress of like all
you needed is a new president. It is sort of
funny though, seeing them sort of lay down on the
sword for the Maryland man from El Salvador who you know,
allegedly beat his wife and allegedly was part of murdering
(04:49):
a rival gang mother or gang member's mother and you.
Speaker 3 (04:53):
Know, allan smuggler too.
Speaker 1 (04:56):
Humans, it just really seems to be the kind of
guy you'd want to get behind. You know what's interesting, too,
is this administration has really encouraged self deportation, and we're
finding out that it's working. And you know, they've done
so by sort of changing the CB one app and
a CB home and our cb P home or CB
home and then also offering money to try to get
(05:18):
people to self deport.
Speaker 2 (05:21):
You know, why do you think they've chosen that option?
Speaker 1 (05:24):
Just probably because it's a path of least resistance or
the messages getting out or kind of what do you
attribute that to.
Speaker 3 (05:30):
Well, there's a lot of illegal aliens and you know,
you can't take them all in the custody and remove them.
I mean, that's just it's a huge problem. And so
what you need is to is to kind of leverage
the regular enforcement that the agents are carrying out in
order to kind of you know, have a multiplier effect.
(05:52):
Because for instance, back during in the fifties, when Eisenhower
had a big illegal immigration deportation effort, they ended up
physically taking into custody and removing about one hundred thousand
illegal immigrants, but about a million people are estimated to
have left, so there was a ten to one ratio there. Likewise,
(06:18):
in after nine to eleven, there was a program called
end Seers. It's a security kind of a registration program
for foreigners from countries that were of concern for terrorism,
and Pakistanis were like the biggest number. And this program
nabbed about fifteen hundred Pakistani illegal aliens, but about fifteen
(06:42):
thousand are estimated to have high tailed it back to
Pakistan on their own self deported.
Speaker 2 (06:49):
Now.
Speaker 3 (06:49):
I don't think you're going to get a ten to
one ratio now necessarily, but it's free to the taxpayer
completely apart from this issue of you know, they're paying
these bonuses if you go home, and you know through
this CBP one or CBP home app. But people who
(07:12):
just go on their own, they sort of figure, oh
my god, I don't want to get arrested. I'm kind
of thinking about going home anyway. And so you know, Maria,
pack up the kids and we're going to head back
two steps ahead of the law. That doesn't cost us anything,
and it you know, it's a it's kind of a
it's a multiplier effect for enforcement. So it is essential
(07:36):
that you pursue a self deportation strategy, whether you call
it that or not. And the one of the reasons
that can work it's not as though, like I said,
it's not as though they they've thought up this idea
on their own. There. One of the reasons that can
work is there's always some illegal aliens leaving anyway, because
(07:57):
there's always churn in the illegal population. So the key
to attrition of the illegal population is fewer people coming
in and more people going out. I mean, it's pretty
you know, pretty basic arithmetic. And the way you get
more people to leave again, some people are always going
to be leaving. The way you get more people to
(08:18):
leave is you make clear that you're enforcing the law.
And a key point here is that self deportation cannot
work if it's just about arrest, if the enforcement side
of it it's just about arresting criminals. Because most illegal immigrants,
I mean, they've almost all committed some significant federal crimes,
(08:41):
but most of them are related to immigration, tax frauds,
social security fraud, ID fraud, that kind of stuff. As
far as violent crimes or drug dealing or what have you,
most illegal aliens don't do that stuff. They're just working
stiffs like anybody else. And if the enforcement is only
against criminals and not at work sites and what have you,
(09:03):
then you know an ordinary schmoe who's not raping anybody
and not selling drugs, we'll figure, well, he doesn't have
anything to worry about. That's why you have to do
both going after the criminals and going after regular illegal
aliens in order to get self deportation to work.
Speaker 1 (09:23):
We've got to take a quick commercial break more with
Mark on the other side. If you like what you're hearing,
please share on social media or maybe send it to
a friend. You know, it was interesting because one of
your colleagues in the New York Post wrote about the
nearly million people who are self deported, and you know,
(09:46):
an article from the Washington Post talking about how a
million foreign born workers have exited the workforce since March. However,
also noting in the article that hourly wages have accelerated
the same time.
Speaker 2 (10:02):
What message does that send you.
Speaker 1 (10:07):
That despite you know, foreign born workers leaving the exit
or exiting the workforce and being told that that's going
to weaken the labor supply, but yet hourly wages have
accelerated at the same time.
Speaker 2 (10:17):
Like what what? What message does that send you? What
do you draw from that?
Speaker 3 (10:21):
That's not a coincidence. I mean, when the labor market tightens,
then wages go up. In other words, if there are
fewer people we didn't reason obviously, but if there are
if there are fewer people for looking for jobs and
employers have to, you know, uh sort of hustle to
find workers, they're going to respond in a bunch of ways.
(10:42):
One of which is they're going to offer more money.
So it's not coincidental that the forearm some signif there's
been significant exit of foreign born workers from the workforce
and at the same time, UH wages, especially hourly wages,
have gone up. Those are actually related phenomenon. That's kind
(11:03):
of the whole point, or part of the point. And
I wish the administration we're making that argument better. Maybe
that's That's part of my reason it's a and not
a plus, is that they have this great news that
their enforcement efforts are actually bearing fruit for regular workers.
(11:25):
In other words, it's not just the you know, rapists
and what have you that they're getting out, which is
obviously beneficial for everybody. We don't want those people here
at all, nobody does. But immigration enforcement is also supposed
to help workers, ordinary workers, especially less skilled people, and
to increase their bargaining power because there's fewer people competing
(11:46):
with them, and they actually have you know, they've got
a success they can point to. And the you know,
in that announcement about the hourly about the wages increase
in wages for hourly workers, they didn't make the connection
was from the Treasury Department. I think, and so I'm
not sure one hand knows what the other is doing,
(12:07):
but they've got a victory there, and they should have
been talking about it, because part of the point of
immigration enforcement is to increase the bargaining power of less
skilled workers. Because most government policies, at least in this
economic area, immigration and a lot of others, are going
(12:29):
to have one of two effects. Either they're going to
make it easier for employers to find workers or easier
for workers to find jobs, one or the other. A
loose labor market helps employers because it means that workers
have to hustle to find jobs. A tight labor market
(12:53):
means that workers don't have to hustle to find the
jobs as much employers have to hustle to find the workers.
And you know, obviously there's a lot of moving parts
to anything, but all of the things being equal, I
think it is. And this is a normative judgment. You
could have a different conclusion, but I think that the
(13:16):
balance of kind of interests should be on making it
possible making it necessary for employers to hustle to find
workers by offering more money, different benefits, different working conditions,
whatever it is, rather than forcing workers to hustle to
find jobs.
Speaker 1 (13:37):
You know, because obviously the whole argument from the left
and some of the right as well as well, we
need these people for you know, these jobs, whether it's
in the field or what have you. And you know,
we're not going to get Americans.
Speaker 2 (13:50):
To fill these jobs.
Speaker 1 (13:53):
You know, that's always sort of the argument for you know,
pro mass immigration, right.
Speaker 3 (14:01):
Yep, yeah, it's the I even had a hashtag back
when they still use hashtags jaw d jobs Americans won't do.
And you know, there's sort of a kernel of truth there,
but not very much. The fact is that almost all
occupations that the Census Bureau tracks, because they slice and
(14:22):
dice all the jobs in the country into i don't know,
several hundred, four hundred, five hundred different occupations, and almost
all of them are majority native born, not even just
legal workers. So you include native born and legal immigrants.
The majority in almost every job category is native born.
And there's only one job category where where more than
(14:46):
sixty percent of the workers are immigrants. And again that's
not illegal, that's just any kind of immigrants, even if
the US citizens, and that's manicurists and whatever, you know,
nail people working in nail shops or whatever it. That's it.
Even in things like you know, office cleaning, janitorial work,
(15:09):
all of that stuff, the majority are native born. So
you can't say that a job where, say, even if
it's only fifty percent of the people who do it
are native born, you can't say that's a job Americans
won't do because half of the people doing the job
are Americans. The only place that argument holds any water
(15:29):
is in certain narrow farming occupations, like the harvest of
fresh fruits and vegetables, because that has become completely foreignized.
But even there, first of all, there's an unlimited guest
worker program, so we don't need illegal immigration to do that.
It's just that farmers need to follow the rules, and
(15:51):
there's rules about pay and housing and transportation, which many
farmers don't want to have to bother with. But the
other thing is many of those jobs shouldn't ex just
in a modern society. The United farm Workers puts out
a video around Thanksgiving. They lose all the time, but
they make a big push before Thanksgiving to say that,
you know, farm workers are why you have food on
(16:13):
your table, this kind of thing, and they show these
videos of people doing farm work, and they're hardworking people,
and I'm sure they're fine people doing this work. But
the one that really stuck in my mind was a
guy kneeling in the dirt, pulling radishes out by hand
and then rubber banding them in bunches and going on
(16:33):
to the next one. He was incredible dexterity, working really hard.
And why on earth is a modern society, you know,
have to feed itself by bringing in foreign workers to
kneel in the dirt and pull things out of the
ground with their hands. It's medievil And so you know,
(16:54):
mechanization can solve, if not all, almost all of these problems.
But what interest is there on the part of a
farmer to invest the money in mechanization or even a
you know, a farm equipment company from researching and building machines.
(17:15):
If you know you've got seventeen illegal aliens fighting for
each job, that's just cheaper and easier. So one of
the reasons we need enforcement is not just because you know,
illegality is bad, but also to spur mechanization, labor saving
technology and by definition, productivity increases in farming. So so no,
(17:40):
this whole job Americans won't do things a canard and
it's just a it's just an excuse. Again, you're right,
people on the left and the right, a libertarian and
corporate right at least, use to justify not enforcing immigration laws.
Speaker 1 (17:56):
Although it is sort of interesting because you would think
that people who are so pro immigrant and pro human
rights would want more protection for those workers.
Speaker 3 (18:05):
So well, it was like that, Yeah, it was like
that in the old days. Caesar Chavez, who started United
farm Workers and now is some kind of icon for
the left and for the racial chauvinists among the Hispanics,
he was a regular union guy. First of all, he
wasn't a one of these Larraza chauvinists. He thought that
(18:27):
was a racist. Actually, he explicitly said that this Larraza
thing is just the Nazi concept. He literally used that language.
But he also, in the economic sense, believed in limiting
access to the country through immigration enforcement in order to
improve the lot of the workers who were here. And
(18:51):
you know, he used to complain the border patrol ism
arresting these people and I've sent them lists of where
they are, and they won't go and arrest them because
the big employers and the politicians don't want the law,
didn't want the law enforced. So you know, we can
use a lot more Caesar Javaz, real Caesar job As
in the fields today, not the kind of fake Caesar
(19:14):
Chavez is that the lefties are retailing now.
Speaker 1 (19:19):
Well, it's interesting we've seen from President Trump recently, just
in a span of a few days, sort of this
reversal on the workplace raids, you know, particularly in agriculture
and hospitality. And on June twelfth he sort of indicated
this pause on raids like farms and hotels and restaurants,
and then by June sixteenth he reversed that guidance resuming
(19:41):
these enforcement at these work sites.
Speaker 2 (19:45):
You know, what do you.
Speaker 1 (19:46):
Think led to that sort of initial kind of like pause,
and then why do you think he's since reversed it,
and sort of what do you make of that whole ordeal.
Speaker 3 (19:56):
He was There's two things. First, he was heavy lobbied
by business interests and specifically by the Secretary of Agriculture
for Rollins, who is kind of the lobbyist for the
egg industry in the government rather than the government's representative
to the egg industry. And you know, there's the distractions
(20:17):
of the la riots and the war in the Middle East.
And the other thing is the president's businessman, and he
you know, he's used seasonal workers, and he realizes that
it is in fact a headache sometimes for businesses to
fill a lot of these jobs. And that's that's true enough,
no question, it's not a reason not to do immigration enforcement,
(20:39):
but the headache can be real. And so you put
those things together, he was like, Okay, yeah, you know,
we'll go easy on some of these employers. And like
almost instantly, he got pushback both from his base people saying, look,
this is we voted to you for you to you know,
enforce immigration laws. What do you talk about? And from
(21:02):
within the administration. I mean, this was this just led
to an explosion inside the admin. And it's to their
credit that you didn't have a lot of people leaking
to the media criticizing this. They kept the fight inside,
which is where it belongs. But they waged it. And
(21:23):
I don't know, you know, if there were people threatening
to resign high profile people if he didn't go back
on it. Again, I'm not being coy here. I really
don't know, but I suspect there may have been those
kind of threats because this is this would have been
if they stuck with it and exempted all restaurants, farms,
meat packers, and hotels from the immigration law. That would
(21:47):
have been a torpedo below the waterline for the president's
credibility on his you know, marquee issue. So the temptation
to do this was always there, and frankly will continue,
I'm afraid. But the president, I guess the way to
put it is, he passed the test. He initially failed it,
(22:11):
but it was you know, in other words, where he
caved into business concerns, but that wasn't a final decision,
and in the end he came to the right conclusion.
So you know, maybe that's another reason I'd have the
AS for the grade rather than an eight plus. But
it's still an A because they, you know, he did
(22:32):
the right thing, and they have literally just within days
said no, no, everybody's you know libeled immigration enforcement. Nobody
gets a special pass or a special exemption, and that's
the way it should be.
Speaker 2 (22:47):
Quick break more with Mark.
Speaker 1 (22:51):
You know, it's interesting because your organization, the Center for
Immigration Studies, estimates that we have about fifteen point four
million at legal aliens. I think you mentioned that before
in the conversation as well. Obviously that's a lot of people.
You know, even just that million number for self deportations
doesn't get the job done. Even the deportations that he's
trying to do, doesn't get the job done. So like,
(23:13):
what do you do about this massive illegal population?
Speaker 3 (23:18):
Well, look, it's a process, it's not an event. I mean,
the administration has only been around for what is it
four months or something a five months. You know, it's
going to take time, and the issue is not you know,
have they solved the problem today if we could, you know,
if they if they've been able to engineer a million
self deportations, you figure over the next three and a
(23:40):
half years another I don't know, that's uh five million,
Maybe people leave on their own six million, and they
actually deport another couple million or three million, I don't know.
We'll see that. You're taking a huge chunk out of
this regal immigrant legal immigration problem. So I think it's
(24:04):
too much to expect that even just in one term
they're going to solve the whole problem overnight. They're making
real progress, and so they just need to keep at it.
You keep the enforcement of physically taking people into custody
and removing them. You combine that with increasing efforts to
spur self deportation. So there's other things they need to
(24:27):
do there. For instance, we need to have Everify mandated
for all new hires. That's an online system, free online
system the government runs so that when an employer hires
somebody and submits the regular payroll information, social security and IRS,
they also go to another website. It should be integrated, frankly,
(24:49):
but maybe it will be at some point. But they
now go to another website and you just put in
their name, social and date of birth and it tells
you whether they're it matches their records. Is this person
is this person authorized to work? It's not perfect, but
it works pretty well for a government program. We've been
using it for years. The problem is it's not mandatory.
Only about half of new hires go through this system,
(25:12):
and there are ways to fool it, but it's hard,
it's not easy to fool, and it needs to be
mandatory for all new hires everywhere to have any meaning
as far as to be able to prompt and spur
more self deportation. And there's a whole bunch of other
things they need to do. For instance, it needs to
be and this is a Treasury Department thing. It needs
(25:33):
to be impossible for illegal aliens to open bank accounts.
Under Obama, they actually explicitly made it lawful to the
forms of ID you have to present. They made it
lawful to use forms of ID that only illegal aliens
bothered a cat like consular ID cards from foreign governments.
(25:54):
They need to make it increasingly difficult for illegal immigrants
to get drivers licenses, and there's a whole bunch of
other areas that they need to you know, tighten up on.
But this is they're making real progress. This is the
idea that you know, it's the problem hasn't been solved yet,
and it's you know, there's still some illegal aliens left
(26:16):
even after four years, which there will be. It doesn't
mean that they're not solving the problem. I mean, and
you know, knock on wood, if there's say a JD.
Van's administration, they would continue it. And you know, I
think we've got we actually can't solve this problem. That's
(26:37):
one of the reasons you mentioned our number fifteen something million,
and again we acknowledge that's probably almost certainly an undercount.
It's probably sixteen maybe seventeen million when you add it
all together. Again a lot of people. But that's why
I think the the idea of some people sort of
on the restrictionist side that who scoff at that number
(26:59):
as too low, and it's like, no, there's twenty five
thirty million, there's a fifty million illegal eight one hundred million.
I mean, it's ludicrous. If there really were fifty million
illegal immigrants, then I'm not sure we could solve the problem.
I mean we might have to just throw our hands
up and amnesty people and start over again. The problem
we have is big enough, but it's not too big
(27:21):
that it can't be you know, can't be solved. So
I actually think they're making good progress and we're going
in the right direction.
Speaker 2 (27:30):
Well, I'm sure too.
Speaker 1 (27:31):
It's frustrating because I feel like so much a public
policy is just common sense. Like even just executive orders
imposing travel bands from countries where we can't vet them
like that makes sense. Not letting people in on visas
who hate our country, that makes sense.
Speaker 2 (27:45):
If you secure your border, you're.
Speaker 1 (27:47):
Going to not have a legal immigration like that makes
it right?
Speaker 2 (27:50):
It like so much of this is just common sense.
Speaker 1 (27:53):
Yet you know which you know, really just indicates that
what we saw on earth the Bio administration was intentional
because it's almost too easy to solve if you really
want to.
Speaker 3 (28:03):
The intentional nature of what the Biden people did is real,
but it's not. I take issue with a lot of
our friends and allies who say, you know, they're importing
these people to import voters or to influence the census
count so they get more seats in the House in
(28:24):
twenty thirty.
Speaker 2 (28:25):
Or even that.
Speaker 3 (28:26):
Definitely, yeah, I mean those are real impact.
Speaker 2 (28:29):
Yeah, But my.
Speaker 3 (28:32):
Point is I don't think that's what the immigration people
in the administration were actually thinking. In other words, it
wasn't a strategy. They do not, did not, and still
do not believe that immigration limits are morally defensible. They
think immigration law as such is Jim Crow and therefore
(28:52):
anybody who shows up at the border has to be
let in. Period. You see what I mean, in other words,
is an ideological concern that has the benefits that I
mentioned for them. Sure, but what drove the Biden immigration people,
whether it's ma Orcist or all of the you know,
the DHS secretary or all the others, is that they
(29:13):
do not think that the American people have the right
to say no to any foreigner who wants to come in.
And once that word got out, they all started coming in.
Speaker 2 (29:25):
And before we.
Speaker 1 (29:26):
Go, I think, you know, when we see sort of
the protests in LA and you listen to Mayor Karen Bass,
it seems like basically what they're saying to your point
of what you're just saying now, like surrender your country
to legal aliens.
Speaker 2 (29:40):
And so I think at the heart.
Speaker 1 (29:41):
Of this issue is really just sovereignty, like are we
are like are we a sovereign nation or not?
Speaker 2 (29:50):
And you know, that just seems to be the crux
of the issue to me.
Speaker 3 (29:53):
Absolutely no, I mean that's that's now the a litmus
test issue on the left that they reject. They reject
American sovereignty. I mean, it's as simple as that. They're
like the Libertarians who were ostensibly still on the right
but really are now part of the left coalition. The
Cato Institute people and the rest of them are because
(30:14):
of immigration actually and this whole issue of sovereignty and
self determination, they are. They're part of the left, and
that is the key issue. This isn't about whether how
you know, some visa program works or what's the best
way to promote you know, better cooperation with law enforcement
(30:35):
or whatever it is. Those are for the left and
the libertarians. Those are secondary issues. They reject the concept
of American sovereignty over immigration. And so anybody who gets
in has a right to come in and a right
to stay if they want to. We have no right,
literally have no right to let them leave. I mean
(30:56):
to make them leave. And so that is the key
issue are we do we basically is do the American
people have a right to make laws? Can they govern?
Can we govern ourselves and make laws and enforce those laws?
And the answer not just on immigration, but immigration is
(31:16):
where you see it most in most stark contrast, the
answer of those, and this is a mainstream democratic position
now is no, American people do not have the right
to limit immigration, period and we're seeing everything else flows
from that, whether it's Los Angeles or you know, anything
else that's insane.
Speaker 1 (31:36):
Mark Krekorian, Executive director of Center for Immigration Studies. Appreciate
your time, interesting stuff.
Speaker 2 (31:42):
Thank you very much.
Speaker 3 (31:44):
Thank you.
Speaker 1 (31:44):
That was Mark Krekorian, Executive director of the Immigration Those.
Mark Krekorian, Executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies,
Appreciate him for making the time to come on the show.
Appreciate you guys at home for listening every Tuesday and Thursday,
but you can listen throughout the week.
Speaker 2 (32:00):
Next time.
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show News
Hosts And Creators
Clay Travis
Buck Sexton
Show Links
WebsiteNewsletterPopular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
The Breakfast Club
The World's Most Dangerous Morning Show, The Breakfast Club, With DJ Envy And Charlamagne Tha God!
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.