Drew Angerer/Getty Images

During a roundtable discussion on immigration on May 16, President Trump made a comment about some immigrants being animals, not people. Although this latest example of anti-immigrant rhetoric is unfathomably cruel, Trump isn’t nearly done conflating immigrants and criminals, despite strong evidence that shows no relationship between the two groups. Democrats need to recognize the pattern and develop a plan for how to respond.

Over the past few years, it has become clear that Trump’s anti-immigrant rhetoric follows a predictable (if overlapping) three-step process to dehumanize immigrants. First, he makes an inflammatory remark about a deliberately ambiguous group of immigrants. Second, he identifies a nefarious villain — a gang, a perpetrator of a real or imagined crime, and insists that his remark was directed at that villain. Third, he demands that the press ignore his own history of racist comments about shithole countries and biased Hispanic judges, and portray the remarks in the most charitable light possible. He does so counting on the ensuing debate to elevate the obscure villains to the forefront of public consciousness.

Let’s trace the pattern through his “animals” episode. Step one — the inflammatory remark about an ambiguously-defined group of immigrants. During a roundtable discussion on California’s “sanctuary” laws, which restrict Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) from using local law enforcement’s databases or speak to people in jails unless they reach a certain “threshold” by committing a violent crime or other serious offense, Trump said the following:

“We have people coming into the country, or trying to come in — and we’re stopping a lot of them — but we’re taking people out of the country. You wouldn’t believe how bad these people are. These aren’t people. These are animals…”

Step two — the villain. Following a wave of progressive condemnation, the White House issued a press release contending that the context shows that the “animals” comment was actually aimed at brutally violent MS-13 gang members. The context does not show that. At the roundtable, Sheriff Mims of Fresno County, CA, used a hypothetical of a nonviolent individual with suspected ties to the gang, to illustrate her complaint. This turns out to be the only reference to MS-13 preceding Trump’s comment: “There could be an MS-13 member I know about — if they don’t reach a certain threshold, I cannot tell ICE about it.”

Step three — an ensuing debate that spotlights the villain. Since Trump’s comment, the right-wing has gone into overdrive with the right-wing punditry issuing smug declarations that the left is now defending violent gang members.

This pattern is easily identifiable in Trump’s past comments, like his claim in 2015 that Mexican immigrants are rapists. So how should Democrats respond?

First, Democrats should not take the bait. Trump makes this move in the hopes that he’ll get a few Democrats to insist on the humanity of the villain. Most people rightly have nothing but contempt for actual violent criminals, which is why Trump is so eager to conflate immigrants with criminals in the first place. Democrats need not abet that conflation by associating their defense of immigrants with a concurrent defense of violent criminals.

Second, Democrats should call foul on Trump’s rhetorical sleight of hand. The more that Democrats explain the role that Trump’s deliberate ambiguity plays in his campaign to vilify immigrants, the fewer people will fall for the ruse.

Third, and most importantly, Democrats should set the factual record straight. As is always the case, the “animals” comment has drawn attention away from the inaccuracy of the picture Trump’s painting of “bad people” coming to the United States and being kicked out. In fact, Trump’s immigration policy is not actually focused on deporting criminals — the 45,436 people arrested by ICE since his inauguration to the end of 2017 do not even have criminal records. During President Obama’s last year in office, 16 percent of immigrants arrested were not criminals. In contrast, each month since July 2017, between 32 and 40 percent of immigrants arrested were not criminals.

Worse still, data suggest that Trump’s indiscriminate deportation policies have decimated cooperation with police among the very immigrant communities that MS-13 preys on, emboldening the gang to terrorize people who cannot go to the police. Indeed, the entire premise of Trump’s remarks is misguided: studies frequently show that immigration and crime do not have a connection, and some research suggests that immigration is associated with a decrease in crime.

It is true that the core of Trump’s base, which ingests conspiracy theories and anecdotes of immigrant crime on a regular basis, is unlikely to be moved by the data. However, if Democrats want to move the moderates that they will need to win the 2018 midterms, they need to have a plan to respond to Trump’s dehumanizing comments. Don’t take the bait, identify the pattern, and, most of all, relentlessly emphasize the data.

Deshani Gunathilake is a freelance writer who lives and works in Washington, DC. She writes about human rights and civil liberties and can be found on Twitter: @dd_gunners.

(Photo: Joe Raedle, Getty Images)

On February 17, the Kansas GOP approved a resolution opposing ‘all efforts to validate transgender identity,’ which is completely unsurprising given the state party’s recent actions toward the LGBTQ community. The state party has taken a hard right position on social issues in an attempt to protect and privilege evangelical ideas at the expense of the LGBT community’s civil liberties.

In 2015, former Governor Sam Brownback repealed an executive order that prohibited the discrimination and harassment of LGBTQ state workers. During his tenure, the Republican controlled state legislature also passed a bill allowing faith-based college groups to restrict membership to like-minded people, in effect sanctioning groups to deny membership to those who identify as LGBTQ. In 2016, the state Senate approved a resolution that opposed the infamous “bathroom bill” — the Obama administration’s directive to schools receiving federal funding to allow transgender students to use restrooms corresponding to their gender identity.

While the Supreme Court decision in Obergefell v. Hodges legalized same-sex marriage in all fifty states in 2015, the Republican Party platform opposes same-sex marriage, saying “our children’s future is best preserved within the traditional understanding of marriage.” Donald Trump, tweeted last July that he will be banning the service of transgender troops. The Republican National Committee has since endorsed the ban and sided with Trump on defining transgender as “a disqualifying psychological and physical” condition.

The lead proponent of the resolution asserts that the party recognizes the dignity of people who identify as gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender. Yet, the GOP shows a clear trend of denying the dignity and liberty of those who identify as LGBTQ, in particular transgender people, by designing and passing laws that discriminate and dehumanize.

Triggered by Coffee Machines: The Feelings-Free Right that Never Was

By Deshani Gunathilake

I pulled an "Office Space" with my Keurig... Would be a shame if everyone else joined me in the Keurig Smash Challenge #BoycottKeurig #IStandWithHannity #SundayMorning pic.twitter.com/yEADeRC006

— Angelo John Gage (@AngeloJohnGage) November 12, 2017

Fox News’ Sean Hannity and supporters of Alabama Republican Senate candidate Roy Moore have resorted to smashing their Keurig coffee machines. This is in protest of the company pulling its advertisements from Hannity’s show, prompting CEO Bob Gamgort to apologize for the decision. This follows hot on the heels of some conservatives boycotting the NFL over players kneeling during the national anthem to protest police brutality. Conservatives have embraced a veneer of apathy, belittling liberals’ distress over perceived injustices and dubbing them “snowflakes.” But the #BoycottKeurig phenomenon betrays an increasingly frail conservative psyche. It seems conservatives are fine with histrionics when one of their own is under attack.

The Keurig boycott is the conservatives’ response to Keurig Green Mountain pulling their advertisements from Hannity’s show, after he defended Moore against allegations of pedophilia. Moore is accused of having pursued a sexual relationship with a woman when she was 14 and he was 32, and having numerous other affairs with women between the ages of 16 to 18. According to one of his former colleagues, it was common knowledge in the early 1980s that Moore dated high school girls. On Hannity’s radio show, Moore vehemently denied the allegations and called them a political attack.

Hannity used the opportunity to defend Moore, adding to the conversation with suggestions like, people lie all the time, “it’s something to think about.” His defense of Moore was limited to him being attacked by the establishment GOP because he’s someone they can’t control, that Bill Clinton was not asked to step down after the Monica Lewinsky scandal, and “how do you possibly tell, know the truth?” Following this, Keurig Green Mountain and several other advertisers, including Realtor.com, withdrew their advertisements from Hannity’s show. Since coffee machines are much easier to smash than a real estate listings website, Hannity’s supporters have taken to social media to break their Keurigs — using hammers, golf clubs, and tossing one off a second-story window — and announcing a boycott against the advertisers. Hannity — having long forgotten how he ridicules “coddled, crybaby liberals” for caring too much — is humbled and speechless, and loving the attention.

Perhaps the reason why conservatives have shed their contrived nonchalance is that the last time advertisers withdrew support for a Fox talk show host (hint: Bill O’Reilly), it cost him his job. Earlier this year, The New York Times released an article that Bill O’Reilly, Fox’s then-top talk show host, paid $13 million to women who accused him of sexual harassment. Advertisers like Mercedes-Benz and Hyundai pulled their advertisements from his program, and more than fifty others followed. Just a few weeks later, O’Reilly was ousted from Fox News, although he recently appeared as a guest on Hannity’s show. Clearly, advertisers’ decisions have a huge impact, and for conservatives, a little hysteria is fine to protect your own. In any event, it is rather rich to see conservatives resort to smashing their own property to stick it to those with different viewpoints in light of their vocal disdain for liberal “safe spaces.”

With the Keurig boycott, conservatives — once uncaring and dismissing of pedantry — have shown that they do care. For some, the threshold seems to be an attack against their beloved conservative talk show host, even if he is a pedophilia apologist. For others, the threshold seems to be reports alleging that an old, white, conservative candidate with a history of bigotry is a sexual predator, disputing his credibility. When one of their own is under attack, the demographic that longs for “family values” can conveniently abandon the idea in a hurry. In fact, 35 percent of voters said the allegations against Moore made them more likely to vote for him. As conservative outrage over attacks against their sacred crusaders grew, it became blatantly clear that for them, “fuck your feelings” does not apply. The idea that conservatives navigate politics without being triggered by perceived injustices (like they claim liberals do), as the latest spectacle proves, is a façade.

Perhaps more importantly than exposing conservatives’ front, advertisers’ actions have pressured the talk show host to distancing himself from Moore. Hannity’s incomplete epiphany came in various stages. He first gave Moore an ultimatum to explain the inconsistencies in his responses to the allegations, or drop out of the race, but circled back to saying that Moore should have the benefit of the doubt. Hannity also quite absurdly said whether the allegations are true or not “shouldn’t be decided by me,” and that it’s up to Alabama voters to decide. Hannity’s weak attempt at modesty would have been laughable if he did not wield such influence in swaying conservative opinion. The role of advertiser support is all the more important in the age of “fake news,” when the president and his base continuously attack journalism smearing all except a few organizations as “crooked media.” Advertiser withdrawal might not have pressured Hannity to fully retract his defense of Moore, but it forced him to acknowledge the significance and consequence of the allegations.

Regardless of Hannity’s stance, his supporters stay committed to protecting him from the perceived injustice of advertiser withdrawal. As #IStandWithHannity demonstrates, there never was a feelings-free right, but a right that merely pretends to not care, only to match liberal tears when a conservative grievance is under attack. But after the latest Keurig debacle? Conservatives, it is time to stop pretending that you don’t care anymore.

Deshani has written for the Washington Examiner and the Foundation for Economic Education. She can be found on Twitter @dd_gunners.