The roundtable on Saturday was discussing Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids in Chicago in which community members said that — to quote an eyewitness report referenced by host Abby Phillip — “[T]hey was bringing kids down, too. Had them zip tied to each other.”
Now, never mind that eyewitness reports are usually worth the paper that they’re printed on. One, of course, feels sorry for children caught up in any kind of violence. There’s no shortage of it in Chicago, particularly from gangs like Tren de Aragua — which, in case you haven’t heard, is what ICE and the administration is targeting, in large part.
Jennings made the rather salient point that “if the federal government knows that there is a nest of Tren de Aragua in a city like Chicago, they have a responsibility, they have an obligation to go get them.” This, to Lathan, was an issue — and he wanted Jennings to answer a yes-or-no question with a flawed premise.
“I know that Tren de Aragua and gangs and whatever, it’s a catch-all to treat people however you want, to go in there and shred the Constitution or whatever else it is that you want to do,” Lathan said. “What I’m asking you is this — do you think that children should have been zip tied and pulled out of an apartment complex and traumatized like that? Yes or no?”
Jennings, the voice of reason: “I don’t think children should be put in harm’s way by transnational gangs.”
Lathan: “Just answer the question, yes or no? Do you think that children –“
Ah, yes, that old feint: Just answer the question. Jennings, not unwisely, said he rejected the “premise of your question” and that “the government is its not putting children in harm’s way. Tren de Aragua is. They’re the one putting children in harm’s way.”
Lathan, apparently not having learned the first time: “Gentlemen to gentlemen, we have a responsibility for the way we treat people with the power that we have here in America. And we have a standard that we should treat human life with. And I’m asking you very clearly, concisely, should children be treated that way? Does Scott Jennings like that?”
Jennings, again: “I don’t accept the premise of your question. I don’t believe that the premise of your question is accurate. I would ask you back, should children be allowed to live in an apartment building with Tren de Aragua? Should the entire community of Chicago have to live with Tren de Aragua because they hide behind these children?”
At this point, political strategist Ashley Allison broke in and tried to make the point that law enforcement shouldn’t act like Tren de Aragua, which they don’t; they don’t traffic drugs, terrorize neighborhoods, or summarily execute their enemies. However, the damage was already done by Lathan’s absurd false binary:
Anybody who wants to know why the only real outrage over ICE raids and National Guard deployments to crime hotspots is coming from astroturfed progressives who think the right to deal and/or smoke fentanyl in public is in the Constitution (or should be, anyway) probably should view this clip a few times, and then a few times more, until they get it.
No, I do not want to see children in zip ties. I also do not want to see children in households with Tren de Aragua members and their confederates, who are not only putting those children at risk but the children of law-abiding, legally residing parents at risk, as well.
That’s who American voters care about. If you don’t believe me, believe the fact that Donald Trump is in the Oval Office and Kamala Harris is on an absurd book tour blaming her failure on everyone but herself. Van Lathan doesn’t, but that doesn’t mean you need to be that gullible.
