Michael Leahy of the Washington Post is currently engaged in a chat about illegal immigration here. So far, he's answered three puffball/smear questions but hasn't yet answered mine:

--
Regarding "Latino activists", isn't it true that Hispanics from different countries of origin have different political viewpoints, and that even from the same country of origin not all think the same way?

Isn't it true that a good percentage of Hispanics actually support our immigration laws?

And, isn't it true that some "Latino activists" who support illegal immigration have links to the Mexican government?
--

And:

--
What role does political corruption play in illegal immigration?

As you no doubt know, remittances is a multi-billion dollar industry, and many U.S. corporations profit off sending money from illegal aliens in the U.S. to Mexico.

They then donate a portion of that money to politicians.

Likewise with manufacturing companies, growers, etc. who profit off illegal activity.

All of those companies that profit off illegal activity donate a lot of money, and politicians tend to do what they want: look the other way on our immigration laws.

Hasn't our political system been corrupted by illegal immigration?

Should papers like the WaPo really support illegal immigration, or should they fight against it?
--

And:

--
Isn't your claim about the BP vs. the MMP not entirely accurate? Isn't it true that Washington officials of the BP oppose the MMP, but the front-line agents of the BP generally support them?

Perhaps you should look a bit deeper into that side of things, eh?
--

Please submit your own questions that might be a little tougher than those he's already received. I guess it ends around 2pm EST.