For years, the mainstream media has been criticized for open political bias, including repeating false narratives and claims. There is little evidence that that will change despite falling revenues and audiences. That was evident this week as leading journalists continued to raise a dubious claim about the Trump Administration deporting children, including cancer patients.
The media has been promulgating a false claim that children as young as four are being deported. The Administration immediately stated that the decision rested with the mothers on whether they would take the children or leave them in the United States with family.
Many of the same figures accused of promulgating false stories quickly picked up the spin from the Washington Post.
On NBC’s Meet the Press, Kristen Welker pursued the narrative with Secretary of State Marco Rubio:
KRISTEN WELKER: Let’s talk now about some new reporting that came in overnight. I want just to go through it with you and for our audience. Three U.S. citizen children have been deported with their mothers. Now this is according to The Washington Post. The family’s lawyer says one of them is a 4-year-old with Stage 4 cancer, deported without medication or ability to contact doctors. The family’s lawyers are also saying their clients were denied communication with family and legal representatives before being deported, and it’s raising concerns about the issue of due process. That it’s being violated. So let me ask you, is everyone on U.S. soil, citizens and non-citizens, entitled to due process?
MARCO RUBIO: Yes, of course. But let me tell you, it looks- in immigration standing, the laws are very specific. If you are in the country unlawfully, you have no right to be here and you must be removed. That’s what the law says. Somehow over the last 20 years, we’ve completely lost this notion that somehow- or completely adopted this idea that yes, we have immigration laws but once you come into our country illegally it triggers all kinds of rights that can keep you here indefinitely. That’s why we were being flooded at the border, and we’ve ended that. And that’s why you don’t- you see a historically low number of people not just trying to cross our border, trying to cross the border into Panama, all the way down in the Darien Gap. I mean- i it’s been a huge help for those countries as well. On the headline- that’s a misleading headline. Okay? Three U.S. Citizens, ages 4, 7 and 2 were not deported. Their mothers who were illegally in this country were deported. The children went with their mothers. Those children are U.S. citizens- they can come back into the United States- there’s- their father or someone here who wants to assume them. But ultimately who was deported was the mother- their mothers who were here illegally. The children just went with their mothers. But it wasn’t like- you guys make it sound like ICA agents kicked down the door and grabbed the 2 year-old and threw them on an airplane. That’s misleading. That’s just not true.
That would ordinarily leave a journalist looking at their shoes in embarrassment, but Welker decided to double down and add the claim that children are being denied “due process”:
WELKER: Just to be clear, because I do want to get to the overhaul at the State Department. Is it the U.S. policy to deport children, even U.S. citizens, with their families- and I hear what you’re saying- without due process? Just to be very clear there.
RUBIO: Well- no, no, no. No, no. Again, if someone is in this country unlawfully, illegally, that person gets deported. If that person is with a 2-year-old child or has a 2-year-old child and says “I want to take my child with you- with me,” well then you have two choices. You can say yes, of course, you can take your child whether they’re a citizen or not because it’s your child or you can say yes, you can go, but your child must stay behind. And then your headlines would read, “U.S. holding hostage 2-year old, 4-year-old, 7-year-old, while mother deported.”
There is a great deal of litigation working through the courts on the level of due process required for deportations. The public overwhelmingly supports the deportation of unlawful immigrants and elected Trump based on his pledge to carry out such deportations. Unlawful immigrants often spend years in this country despite orders of deportation or removal. The level of review depends on their status. If they have previously entered unlawfully, they are subject to expedited removal.
The critical point, however, is that the children were the ones being deported. If they were born in this country, they are still treated as U.S. citizens (though the Administration is challenging birthright citizenship in the courts). Having a child in the United States does not make parents immune from removal or afford them special legal status over other deportees.
Over at CBS, Margaret Brennan (who was criticized for her “fact checks” in the presidential debate) also jumped on the narrative in interviewing Border Czar Tom Homan on Face the Nation:
MARGARET BRENNAN: On Friday, there were three American citizen children, born here, who were deported along with their mothers from Louisiana down to Honduras. And according to advocates, one of them is a 4-year-old child with Stage Four cancer. A rare form of metastatic cancer who was sent back to Honduras without getting to talk to a doctor and without medication. I understand this child’s mother entered this country illegally. But isn’t there some basis for compassionate consideration here that should have allowed for more consultation or treatment?
TOM HOMAN: Well, it certainly is discretionary. I’m not aware of this specific case. But no U.S. citizen child was deported. Deported means you gotta be ordered — reported by the immigration judge. We don’t deport U.S. citizens.
BRENNAN: The mother was deported along with the children.
HOMAN: These children- Children aren’t deported. The mother chose to take the children with her. When you enter the country illegally and you know you are here illegally and you choose to have a U.S. citizen child, that’s on you. That’s not on this administration. If you choose to put your family in that position, that’s on them. But having a U.S. citizen child, after you enter this country illegally, is not a “get out of jail free” card. It doesn’t make you immune from our laws. If that’s the message we send to the entire world, women are going to keep putting themselves at risk and come to this country. We send a message: you can enter the country illegally, that’s okay, you can have due process at great taxpayer expense, get ordered to move, that’s OK. Don’t leave, but have a U.S. citizen child and you are immune from removal? That’s not the way it works.
BRENNAN: So you don’t think there should be compassionate consideration for a 4-year-old child undergoing treatment for cancer?
HOMAN: I didn’t say that. I said ICE officers do have discretion-
BRENNAN: That was the question.
HOMAN: ICE officers do have discretion. I’m not familiar with the specific case. I don’t know what facts surround this case. I was just made aware of this when you mentioned it this morning. I was not aware of that case.
Brennan correctly noted that a court recently found a lack of due process in a child’s case. However, Holman had a reasonable response in citing the mother’s election in this one case to leave with her child.
BRENNAN: On Friday, a federal judge who was appointed by President Trump said a 2-year-old American citizen child had been sent to Honduras with the mother. But the judge said, quote: “there was no meaningful process.” So again, this is another similar situation and dynamic. Shouldn’t there be special care when the deportation cases involve small American-born children?
HOMAN: First of all, I disagree with the judge. There was due process. That female had due process at great taxpayer expense and was ordered by an immigration judge after those hearings. So she had due process. Again, this is Parenting 101. And you can decide to take that child with you or you can decide to leave the child here with a relative or another spouse. Having a child doesn’t make you immune from our laws of the country. American families get separated every day by law enforcement- thousands of times a day. When a parent gets put in jail, the child can’t go with them. If you are an illegal alien and you come to this country and you decide to have a U.S. citizen child, that’s on you. You put yourself in that position.
BRENNAN: Well, when it came to this particular case, you just pointed out that they could have made arrangements. The father tried, actually, to make arrangements as we understand it through our reporting. But he and the mother who were separated, since she was in detention after showing up for her appointment, was only allowed a very brief phone call. The father tried to petition to get the child handed over to an American citizen relative. So the mother had to make this decision and took the child with her. It just seems like there could be some more time frame here around due process allowed. That’s what the judge is saying, is saying- there should have been more of a process here.
HOMAN: There was due process. The 2-year-old baby- the two year old baby was left with the mother because the mother signed a document requesting her 2-year-old baby go with her. That’s the parent’s decision. I don’t think the judge knows the specifics of this case. The 2-year-old went with the mom. The mom signed a paper saying, “I want my 2-year-old to go with me.” That’s a parent’s decision. It’s not a government decision, it’s a parent’s decision.
BRENNAN: The father wrote a note. Anyhow, we have to leave it there, Director. Thank you for your time today. We’ll be right back.
It is important to note that these are two very different cases that were blended into the coverage. In the second case, the government insists that there was no prior arrangement for the child to be left with the family and that the mother made this decision.
ICE should endeavor to accommodate such requests and there should always be an inquiry into allegations that these women were prevented from making arrangements for their children to remain in the country. However, there will also be practical limits in addressing those issues in the midst of a removal.
If Holman is correct, the mother was in the system long before the actual removal. The father “sending a note” at the end of that process is worth looking into, but it is hardly surprising that the removal proceeded with the mother’s consent.
The same narrative was playing over at ABC as Martha Raddatz had this exchange with former DoJ spokesperson Sarah Isgur:
MARTHA RADDATZ: Sarah, I want to turn here to some information that has been in The Washington Post about deportations of very young children who are American citizens. A 2-year-old, a 4-year-old, a 7-year-old sent back to Honduras. Is that legal?
SARAH ISGUR: This is something our immigration system deals with nearly every day. U.S. citizen children have to make that decision with their parents of whether they’re going to stay. The parent has the decision. We do not allow illegal alien parents to stay just because they have custody over U.S. citizen children, and at least one of these cases with the 2-year-old, the mother was the one who made the decision to take her daughter with her. The father is the one saying he wanted the daughter to stay here. Often times, it’s going to look more like a custody dispute than an immigration question.
Again, as Isgur correctly points out, this is the election of the parents who are being removed.
Critics have pushed back on these interviews, noting how the media seemed only marginally interested in thousands of children lost in the system under the Biden Administration as millions poured over the border. Thousands of unaccompanied children were pushed over the border and then lost by the government, according to the Trump Administration. Many may have ended up with sex traffickers or criminal gangs.
The coverage suggested that children were being thrown on planes to be dumped in some foreign land.
The Washington Post, which is cited for the story, has been repeatedly accused of pushing misleading or false narratives. There was a recent riot in the newsroom when owner Jeff Bezos demanded that the newspaper return to more balanced coverage.
The most telling condemnation came from Post columnist Philip Bump, who wrote “what the actual f**k.” Bump has been repeatedly accused of false claims and previously had a meltdown in an interview when confronted about past false claims. After I wrote a column about the litany of such false claims, the Post surprised many of us by stating that it stood by all of Bump’s reporting, including false columns on the Lafayette Park protests, Hunter Biden’s laptop, and other stories. That was long after other media debunked the claims, but the Post stood by the false reporting.
We have previously discussed the sharp change in culture at the Post, which became an outlet that pushed anti-free speech views and embraced advocacy journalism. The result was that many moderates and conservatives stopped reading the newspaper.
In my book on free speech, I discuss at length how the Post and the mainstream media have joined an alliance with the government and corporations in favor of censorship and blacklisting. I once regularly wrote for the Post and personally witnessed the sharp change in editorial priorities as editors delayed or killed columns with conservative or moderate viewpoints.
Last year, that culture was vividly on display when the newspaper offered no objection or even qualification after its reporter, Cleve Wootson Jr., appeared to call upon the White House to censor the interview of Elon Musk with former President Donald Trump. Under the guise of a question, Wootson told White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre “I think that misinformation on Twitter is not just a campaign issue…it’s an America issue.”
The baby hoax shows that little has (or likely will) change. In the meantime, the public is moving on. New media is rising as mainstream media audiences shrink. Journalists and columnists are increasingly writing for each other as polling shows trust in the media is at an all-time low.
Robert Lewis, a British media executive who joined the Post, reportedly got into a “heated exchange” with a staffer. Lewis explained that, while reporters were protesting measures to expand readership, the very survival of the paper was now at stake:
“We are going to turn this thing around, but let’s not sugarcoat it. It needs turning around,” Lewis said. “We are losing large amounts of money. Your audience has halved in recent years. People are not reading your stuff. Right. I can’t sugarcoat it anymore.”
It simply does not matter. The media continues to vigorously saw on the branch upon which it is sitting.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro professor of public interest law at George Washington University and the author of “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.”
With A.I. buttressing search engines, multiple misinterpretations become first choices in a google search. The “truth” is no longer trustworthy. If anything, A.I. creates a “truth consensus” which is little more than multiple sources plagiarizing each other and reaching a consensus. It is like trying to satisfy your hunger by eating a picture of a hamburger.
“The fact that an opinion has been widely held is no evidence whatever that it is not utterly absurd.” —Bertrand Russell
Yep. So many people are stupid and will fall for anything.
“With A.I. buttressing search engines, multiple misinterpretations become first choices in a google search. The “truth” is no longer trustworthy.”
AI (Artificial Idiocy is my expansion of that acronym) as currently implemented is structurally nothing but an automated version of an old-fashioned “expert system”. As a top level concept, that has some validity. The problem is that, to achieve economies in staffing, elapsed time, and scale, instead of using actual experts, low-level customer service types have been employed to feed “facts” (basically, any random allegation that those CS drones can easily find on the internet to point the system to) into the system’s knowledge base. No effective vetting of those sources is even attempted. So, what we have is essentially “an expert system with no experts” (credit to “Clive Robinson” who posts to Bruce Schneier’s Cryptogram blog @ schneier.com
I am and have been a Trump supporter for some time and I am very apprehensive of unelected Federal Judiciary overreach. I also believe that Biden opened the boarder as a way to change the make up of the population and to that end the electoral college.
But I do think the the Judicial branch should play a part in the review of deportations. I understand the argument that these individuals are here illegally but most (not including got-away) were allowed in here by Federal government policy. I did not agree with that policy but it was what it was under the Biden administration. I also think that Tom Homan is the wrong choice for his position at ICE. He is a wrecking ball and ultimately with his “I can do whatever I want” attitude will cross the line and allow the democrats’ a wedge to taking back the house. You are already seeing that.
Trump should continue with his securing the border and allowing the courts to hear and order deportations.
The immigration courts are in place to do this.
Then why is ICE denying them access to immigration courts?
If there is a deportation order, they’ve had their due process.
I’d like to see a transcript.
I’d like a million $$$.
Tom Homan is doing a great job.
No matter who Prez Trump would have picked, the libs will scream and demean.
“In my book on free speech, I discuss at length how the Post and the mainstream media have joined an alliance with the government and corporations in favor of censorship and blacklisting. I once regularly wrote for the Post and personally witnessed the sharp change in editorial priorities as editors delayed or killed columns with conservative or moderate viewpoints.
Last year, that culture was vividly on display when the newspaper offered no objection or even qualification after its reporter, Cleve Wootson Jr., appeared to call upon the White House to censor the interview of Elon Musk with former President Donald Trump. Under the guise of a question, Wootson told White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre “I think that misinformation on Twitter is not just a campaign issue…it’s an America issue.”
*****************************
mis·in·for·ma·tion /ˌmisənfərˈmāSH(ə)n/, n., Anything a conservative or moderate person says, writes or even thinks that, in the slightest way, interrupts or disputes the Left’s false narrative on any subject.
Why would so much of the media tell the truth when a lie serves their purpose so much better?
Money? Like Jeff Bezos or Disney need a few more million dollars from subscriptions. When balanced against controlling the body politic it’s obvious where the balance lies.
“controlling the body politic ”
If you can do exert that control reliably, on command, money becomes moot. You can get whatever you want, whenever you want it. If what you wanted was a billion USD at the snap of your fingers, you could have that.
The Left is always full of unforeseen consequences.
Media famously has been purging its ranks of conservatives and moderates (and even dissenting liberals). The purged have moved onto alternative media and now are purging their former tormentors from media altogether. Colleges have been purging conservatives, too. Defunding will be the result.
Never start a purge unless you have the guillotine to back it up.
Blue-state pols deliberately made life unbearable for conservatives, but those “leftugees” took their votes from the big, blue, deep freeze and added them and apportionment to red states. Trump benefitted hugely in 2024 from that unforeseen consequence.
Lefties had most of media, nearly all of the federal government, all of academia, and no conscience to impede their hypocrisy… AND STILL LOST! “Stupid is as stupid does.”
A tempest in a teapot. And a small teapot at that. And all because that paragon of virtue and truth, The WASHINGTON Post, said it. The Immigration Czar, Mr. Homan, seems to speak in quite simple and easily discernible English. I suspect that is why the Washington Post cannot understand it. In fact the crackerjack reporter, Margaret Brennan, seems to act like she has learned English as a 2nd language and it’s still a work in progress for her. I’m not sure if she cannot understand the simple concepts being explained to her, or she cannot understand plain English, or her narcissism prevents her understanding or she is just plain stupid. Or all of the above.
I do think that the Professor is beginning to sound more and more exasperated with the Main Stream Media. His writing is starting show outright disdain to this tiresome litany of news incompetence and malpractice. Good for him.
Seems we never heard of these problems when the perfect and transformative Obama was deporting 3 million people and having kids in cages and on and on. Hard to understand the sudden change in direction of the MSM. Did they find God or did they lose their way. Maybe that’s the real question. I suspect I know the answer.
A bunch of daft dimbos who don’t have the intelligence to realize their questions were answered. The reverse is true, also. Daft dimbos who refuse to answer a simple question and instead give the same non-responsive reply over and over.
“On NBC’s Meet the Press, Kristen Welker . . .” “Over at CBS, Margaret Brennan . . .” “. . . at ABC as Martha Raddatz . . .” Trump’s recent interview in the Oval Office with ABC’s Terry Moran:
Read and listen carefully to the tenor of those interviews. They ooze hostility. You can see it in the “gotcha” questions. In the “questions” that are not really questions, but are rather pre-packed accusations and nasty insinuations. In the hyper-aggressive interruptions and split-second changing of the topic. You can see that hostility in the questions that are allegedly asked to elicit factual information about the administration’s policies — but that are prefaced with: “Critics contend that . . .”
The result is not objective journalism — but an unprofessional hit job, a vicious set up.
The American public may not be able to define “objective journalism.” It might not grasp the distinction between reporting and editorializing. It may not know what J-schools are teaching.
But the American public can smell hostility from a mile away.
“The father “sending a note” at the end of that process is worth looking into…” Ah yes, the father sent a note. Surely you’ve read WHY he didn’t show in person? Yes, you guessed it: he too is an illegal alien with a deportation order in effect. His “note” mentioned the 2-year-old could stay with a neighbor/friend who in turn admitted she know OF the couple, but was neither ‘family’ nor close to them at all. Come on professor, tell the whole story, please.
I was implying that in my below comment, yes, but as you can see, it’s so easy to bait the hate nowadays. It’s why you can’t ever use hyperbole with lunatic leftist kleptomaniacs. They take everything, literally.
-Rabble
I get that Turley is commenting more on media’s attempt to three-card-monty their viewers/readers – where’s the truth, where’s the truth, where’s the truth?) than the cases mentioned on the blog. Still, when he says ‘the note’ should be looked into, he should already know – and relay on this blog – what’s known of the contents of the note. As an officer of the court, he certainly has access to public court records. Instead, he’s trying to thread a needle (and sell books) in the middle of the road. And we all know what eventually happens when you live in the middle of the road.
I tried to find an article giving his status, but I couldn’t. The ones I read just said that he ‘resides’ in the US.
Rabble:
And this is why I am glad the admin posited the EO for birthright citizenship, and why I’m glad someone brought a suit against it. Not because we should get rid of it (I, for one, think it is monumentally stupid that we allow anchor babies to rule legislation that has never been questioned), but because the Amendment was put in place solely for freed slaves to gain citizenship.
Now, obviously we don’t have slaves (publicly) in the USA anymore, and the Amendment has been used and abused for the last 50 years; It’s time to revisit some of these Amendments and see how they can hold up against our current climate. Of course, don’t touch 1 and 2, but force some to the SCOTUS to rule solely on how it should be read. AFAIK, we are the only country that allows this concept of ‘anchor babies’, which is, like I said, stupid to the point of Idiocracy.
Every Western Hemisphere country that I know of, has birthright citizenship. That’s why Ted Cruz was born Canadian as well as American, and why John McCain was born Panamanian as well as American (Panama retained sovereignty over the Canal Zone, so their birthright law applied)
I believe in almost all of those cases, at least one of the parents must be a citizen. I would have no problem with that. Do you know that birth right tourism is a thing? Yup.
Why post something that can easily found to be essentially false? Do you do that often?
Not quite. North and South American does. Europe not so much.
Ours does not.
I heard, about the 2-year-old, that the father did indeed put in a request for custody of the child, but did not show up to court at the appointed time. Awfully suspicious, if you ask me. There are other details escaping me right now, but you’d think, if a legal guardian of a child wanted that child with them, and they were legal citizens, wouldn’t they want to come and claim their child?
-Rabble
The details that “escape your mind” have been replaced by completely made up nonsense.
The father took the mother and children to a regularly scheduled immigration check-in. He waited outside and when he realized that it was taking much longer than usual, he was told they had been detained and were already transported.
The authorities refused to tell him where they were moved to.
There was no way for him to “claim” the child.
He tried to “claim” his child, but authorities would not tell him where the child was.
There was no court proceeding.
I’ve not seen those details. Could you link please?
The mother and the older daughter had deportation orders. Which means there already was a court proceeding.
Why do you think illegal aliens who have already been ordered to leave get more due process?
A Trump-appointed judge literally says he suspects US citizens are being deported, and Turley rails on the media for claiming that the US may be deporting US citizens.
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/25/us/politics/us-citizen-deported.html#:~:text=Asserting%20that%20%E2%80%9Cit%20is%20illegal,from%20the%20country%20on%20Friday.
Fact: The US is not deporting citizens, doesn’t matter what some judge “thinks” might be happening. And the media know full well that they are being dishonest.
You posted an opinion and from NY slime…. really
Who cares what he says?
Who was it that said “The media is the enemy of the people”?
“The media continues to vigorously saw on the branch upon which it is sitting.” The media needs to saw even harder and faster, as it is doing too much damage to the survival of the Republic. Full stop.
In general, there are three mechanisms to explain this, and all are credible.
1. The Conspiracy Theory. There are vast sums of money that support the far left, which controls the Democrats, mostly for two reasons: FOF, fear of funding and FAC, fear of cancellation. The latter could be said to be their true FAC(T) checking style.
2. The Resonance Theory. All opposing parties look for issues that will resonate and turn the population against the party in power. The Dems began before Trump even took office. Currently, they are using the courts to considerable nuisance and some effect.
3. The Hate Theory. The Dems hate so much Trump that there is nothing they won’t try to disrupt his reorganization and reconstruction of the Federal government. Here we suppose that most Dems and MSM pathologically hate Trump like crazy.
Number 3 explains it all, including numbers 1 and 2.
#. Door #3. There is hate that cannot be overcome. In such a case restraining orders are imposed. Then geographic locations. Sometimes by continent. It’s the same hate in Gaza and Ukraine
Nothing will change until the American People boycott the advertisers funding this travesty. It’s in our power to do so. They don’t care about readership or audience dropping. But when the money dries up, well that’s something else.
I started years ago. The only time I watch the networks is when sports is on and only because there is no other way to watch sports. If you are conservative or even moderate and you watch ABC, NBC, CBS or CNN you are a dumb conservative or moderate.
No need to boycott sponsors. They automatically leave when ratings for the program they’re ‘sponsoring’ dry up. No viewers = no potential buyers.
Professor Turley,
It is absolutely irresponsible for you to act like the facts of these removals are not in dispute.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/apr/28/women-children-citizens-deported-honduras
Attorneys for the Honduran migrants directly refute the “facts” you note in your article.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/articles/c4g278yn4d3o.amp
And as the judge put it: A hearing has been scheduled for 19 May “in the interest of dispelling our strong suspicion that the government just deported a US citizen with no meaningful process”.
You conveniently leave out the rest of the judge’s own words. Given that proceeding, it is entirely reasonable for journalists to report that the US government may be deporting US citizens.
The Guardian?
You can trust a Communist to act like a Communist.
The UK Guardian – eye roll
RIght? LOL.
Actually in the first article it is about the lawyer making claims for his client and that is a lawyer’s job. It does not make it true nor a fact. It is an assertion.
The second article is from the Judge giving the Federal Government time to explain itself. This could go nowhere fast.
Yet the papers jump all over this because they can. If someone was scooped up and the children got lost in the process, yes they should return as they are citizens, but not the mother.
Everyone has a sneaking suspicion The Trump Administration is playing g fast and loose. I too have a sneaking suspicion. People being deported are using their children as a shield and the papers are choosing sides. I wonder how many of these illegals were already in the process and are trying to game the system by stalling for time.
BTW, the judge tipped their hand by saying the children were deported. Want to bet they will accept no reason given by the Trump Administration. Holman for good or ill is correct saying families get broken up all of the time with the legal system. Remember, illegals are breaking the law just by being here undocumented or hiding from deportation orders.
Right…cause client never lie to their attorneys and attorneys never pass those lies on.
If you’re stupid sure.
MAin Street Media, Left Wing Radical Woke DEMS, I hate Trump crowd have been pushing this story and innocent MS13, Venezuela Gangs, etc. Anything and everything to try and stop Trump.
Thank you professor for pointing out how MSM lies, gaslights, omits relevant facts. Thank you for also pointing out how new media is rising while MSM continues to fail and decline into irrelevance. There clearly no need for MSM as they are nothing but a propaganda mouth piece for the equally irrelevant DNC.
NotReallyaFarmer
Aren’t you supposed to be out in fields somewhere at 8 o’clock on this lovely spring morning??
Who’s taking care of the livestock ???
Who’s preparing for spring planting ???
Aren’t there fences that need to mended after a long winter???
Surely the irrigation system needs to be cleaned out after the winter shutdown.
Or perhaps you are not really a farmer.
Or maybe you have a small army of illegal immigrant slaves doing the work.
And so, instead of actually engaging with the topic, you immediately have resorted to personal attacks and slights.
We see you, ATS, George, Gigi, BabyTrump, Franke, whatever moniker you don next, but also know this: No one actually cares what you say unless you actually bring substance to the table. Must be hard to feed that hate with nothing but your master’s table scraps, huh?
-Rabble
What a fool.
We allow legals from Mexico to work in the fields
Yet even now it’s shrinking because of automation.
Shouldn’t you be sleeping off last night’s over-indulgence somewhere? An alley, abandoned building, cardboard box???
This is a stupid comment
I’d be surprised if their audience has only halved. WaPo and NYT have tunnel vision
Bring on the geriatrics. Spend your entire day here spouting stupid nonsense.
Yeah, why is it that old guys hang out here all day long, many weeks, months, years. What a waste of time.
Anon, no one spends as much time commenting on this column as you do. You apparently have a lot of free time to expend on a a column you apparently have little regard for.
Ahhhhhhhhhhhhh You are here too.
LOL
We apologize. What has tictok told you to believe today, junior?