CBS's Attempt to Attack President Trump's Deportation Project Gets Harsh Response from Homeland Security

 

The legacy media are back to doing what they’ve always done, and CBS is a good example. Even with new leadership and a more polished presentation, the network doesn’t look meaningfully different from the days of Dan Rather. The tone is calmer, the language is smoother, but the bias is still there: hostile to Trump, indulgent toward illegal immigration, and dismissive of basic American interests.

It’s no secret that opposition to Trump’s immigration enforcement now stretches from the left edge of the media to the highest levels of the Democratic Party. Even outlets that like to brand themselves as “libertarian” or “reasonable” fall in line. One of the reasons is political survival. Democrats are staring down serious legal and electoral challenges, especially if the Supreme Court continues to push back on racial gerrymandering and identity-based election engineering. Add to that the reality that loose registration laws, like so‑called motor voter systems that don’t require proof of citizenship, make the issue even more politically charged. You check a box, a clerk waves it through, and that’s that. Whether people want to admit it or not, illegal immigrants have become central to the Democrats’ long-term electoral strategy.

Another familiar argument is that enforcing immigration law hurts business. My view is simple: if your business model depends on illegal labor or illegal customers, that’s not a healthy business. In some states, especially places like Minnesota, many of the loudest complaints come from industries already under scrutiny for large-scale fraud and abuse. It’s hard to take lectures about “economic harm” seriously when taxpayer-funded scams are part of the picture.

Then there’s the emotional appeal to fairness. We all know the story: the illegal immigrant who works hard, keeps his head down, and seems like a good neighbor. We’re told that deporting him is somehow cruel or unnecessary. This is exactly the frame CBS News pushed in a recent report highlighting that fewer than 14% of those arrested by ICE during Trump’s first year back in office had violent criminal records.

What CBS doesn’t emphasize is that 14% of nearly 400,000 arrests still translates to roughly 60,000 violent criminals removed from American communities. That’s not a trivial number. The same internal DHS data CBS relies on also show that nearly 60% of ICE arrestees had criminal charges or prior convictions. Most weren’t classified as “violent,” but that category includes offenses like drug trafficking, child pornography distribution, burglary, fraud, DUI, embezzlement, solicitation of a minor, and human smuggling. Calling those “non-violent” may be technically accurate in a narrow legal sense, but it doesn’t make them harmless.

Even by CBS’s own numbers, ICE is overwhelmingly focused on people who have already shown contempt for our laws. The idea that President Trump promised to target only violent offenders and no one else is a media invention. Violating immigration law is still a crime, and committing additional crimes while here illegally doesn’t earn anyone a free pass just because they didn’t use a gun.

The Department of Homeland Security pushed back, rightly pointing out that around 70% of those arrested had pending charges or prior convictions. Add in those picked up during routine enforcement actions, and it’s obvious that the majority of deportations involve criminals of one kind or another. Being a drug dealer instead of an armed robber doesn’t suddenly make someone a sympathetic victim.

What CBS is really trying to do is soften public opinion and generate sympathy. We’ve seen this playbook before. In the 1990s, the media attacked three‑strikes laws by highlighting carefully selected sob stories, while ignoring the broader, well-documented reduction in crime those policies produced. The facts were clear then, and they’re clear now. Enforcing immigration law reduces crime, eases pressure on housing, and improves job prospects for American citizens.

The article even closes by noting a dip in public support for deportations, as if that settles the issue. For me, it doesn’t. Poll numbers don’t change the basic principle: a country that doesn’t enforce its borders isn’t really a country.

My position is straightforward. I want every illegal immigrant removed. Ideally, they leave voluntarily with assistance. If not, enforcement still needs to happen. Prioritizing violent criminals makes sense, but there’s no reason we can’t enforce the law across the board. Sympathy doesn’t override sovereignty, and fairness begins with following the law.