The main point comes directly from the Federal Reserve and U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics . That is not exactly doubtful misinformation.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LNU02073413

You blanket assumption projecting a singular gaslit motivation from a singular political demographic, supporting 'cracking down' on immigration, seems easily refuted. In the US, polling consistently showed border security to be an issue of concern with the majority of the nation, for decades, and one which crosses all the of political spectrum.

To put it in perspective, being tough on immigration was one of Barack Obama's main campaign positions during his first presidential campaign. I recall his Vegas campaign debate answer suggesting that those who illegally cross the border should "go to the back of the line". (Even though once elected, he seemed to completely abandon this position. It might have been an attempt to reach across the isle and garner more moderate votes, but prior to that, he was instrumental as a Senator in passing the 2006 Secure Fence Act (the execution of this bill was never completed and arguably sabotaged, recklessly blowing more than a $billion on an experiment that failed, rather than the bill's actions, which the public wanted).

I'd also argue that simplifying immigration to be inherent, natural, migratory patterns is pretty naive of the reality of increasing human displacement through as a result of world problems such as pollution, war, corruption, persecution, and oppression.

In the end, immigration 'cracking down', is nothing but enforcing existing laws. These laws provide orderly processes for legal entry, legal asylum, and legal immigration. Enforcing these laws frequently help people immigrate (legally), rather than making it harder.