immigration

MSNBC Backlash: Outlet Changes Title Sympathizing with Laken Riley’s Killer

MSNBC changed the title of one of its opinion articles late last week after readers accused the network of sympathizing with Laken Riley’s killer. The controversy bodes ill for the floundering outlet, which Comcast has announced it will spin off into a different company.

A Georgia judge convicted Jose Ibarra Wednesday for the murder of 22-year-old nursing student Laken Riley, finding Ibarra guilty of malice murder, felony murder, aggravated assault with intent to rape, aggravated battery, hindering a 911 call and tampering with evidence.

Ibarra was subsequently sentenced to life without parole.

In response, MSNBC legal analyst Danny Cevallos penned an opinion piece entitled, “Laken Riley’s killer never stood a chance — For all the political controversy surrounding Jose Ibarra, the outcome of this trial was never in doubt.”

Readers subsequently accused the defense lawyer of implying Ibarra had been railroaded.

The backlash was warranted. Cevallos’ use of the phrase “never stood a chance” suggests Ibarra was unfairly deprived of the chance to be acquitted. His assertion that “the outcome of this trial was never in doubt” likewise implies Judge Patrick Haggard found Ibarra guilty before hearing the evidence.

This insinuation is not based in fact. The prosecution presented nigh irrefutable evidence tying Ibarra to Riley’s brutal murder, including,

  • Ibarra’s fingerprints on Riley’s phone, presumably from when he ended her call to 911.
  • Ibarra’s DNA under Riley’s fingernails, corresponding to scratches on Ibarra’s hands, arms and neck.
  • Surveillance footage showing Ibarra throw a jacket in a dumpster. Investigators found Riley’s hair and blood on the jacket.
  • Surveillance footage showing Ibarra trying to break into another student’s apartment just two hours before he attacked Riley.

MSNBC found Cevallos’ original title similarly indefensible. It quickly replaced it with, “The guilt of Laken Riley’s killer was never in doubt — For all the controversy surrounding Jose Ibarra, the case against him was always a simple one.”

The new title is marginally better, but still bizarrely ambiguous. It could imply that the prosecution’s evidence was insurmountable. It could also imply what the original title did — that Jose Ibarra did not receive a fair trial. 

Cevallos’ equivocation clouds an otherwise simple piece. He posits that the defense waived Ibarra’s right to a jury trial because the case couldn’t be won. At times, Cevallos seems to acknowledge that the evidence against Ibarra made the case unwinnable. He addresses Laken Riley as a victim. He commends the defense for conserving the state’s resources.

But he also includes several comments seeming to impugn Judge Haggard’s decision to sentence Ibarra to life in prison.

Acknowledging the defense’s case had little chance against a jury, Cevallos wrote, “But apparently [the case] had no chance with the judge, either, since he was convicted anyway.” This sentence implies, as the original title did, that Haggard had decided to convict Ibarra before he analyzed the evidence.

If Cevallos had agreed with the sentencing, he wouldn’t have included a comment about Haggard “cutting [Ibarra] no breaks.” Similarly, if Cevallos believed the judge was on the up-and-up, he wouldn’t have started a description of Haggard’s narrow sentencing options with, “In fairness” — a phrase that signals a coming counterargument to an initially negative assessment.

It bears repeating — Cevallos’ veiled insinuations are not based in fact. The prosecution presented a preponderance of evidence tying Ibarra to Riley’s murder. The brutality of the crime and Ibarra’s criminal record and gang affiliations explain Haggard’s sentencing choices.

Cevallos is certainly entitled to his point of view, but journalistic outlets generally don’t platform unsupported opinions — or hire their writers as legal analysts.

Regardless, MSNBC can’t afford another controversy following Comcast’s decision to spin them into a new company, along with USA Network, CNBC, Oxygen, E!, SYFY and the Golf Channel. Comcast maintains the move will allow the ousted networks more room to grow, but staffers aren’t so sure. The spin off effectively de-links MSNBC from NBC, giving showrunners freedom to change the network’s editorial direction.

Comcast has not yet announced how NBC’s resources will be split among the departing affiliates. Nor has the cable juggernaut signaled willingness to sell MSNBC, despite high-profile offers from billionaires like Elon Musk.

MSNBC’s fate may be up in the air, but one thing’s for sure — sympathizing with a convicted killer won’t win them any public support. The network must seriously evaluate the analysis it chooses to platform, or risk losing the platform altogether.

Additional Articles and Resources

Laken Riley Murdered After Killer Took Taxpayer-Funded Flight

Violent Gang Takes Advantage of American Immigration Policy

Debate Over Immigration Labels Obscures Seriousness of Laken Riley’s Death

Illegal Immigrant to Appear in Court for Death of Texas Teen, Illustrates Violent Trend

Illegal Immigrant Arrested in Murder of Maryland Mom

Laken Riley Act Introduced in Senate

Talking to Your Kids About Illegal Immigration

Familial DNA Testing on the Southern Border Shouldn’t Have Ended

The Border Crisis and the Deafening Silence of Women’s Groups

Nonbinary Nonsense: HHS Proposes Rule Making It Harder to Care for Migrant Children

A proposed rule from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) would allow caseworkers to identify unaccompanied migrant children as “nonbinary.” The change would make it harder for HHS to keep track of vulnerable arrivals — a job it already struggles to do.

The proposal would expand gender designations in child advocacy paperwork to include “nonbinary,” in addition to male and female. HHS claims the revision will help officers better care for unaccompanied minor children.

But this change doesn’t improve HHS’ care — it just endangers the children in it’s custody.

First of all, allowing vulnerable children to identify as “nonbinary” is not compassionate or caring. Introducing and affirming gender confusion ensures kids will feel uncomfortable or trapped in their sexed body.  Some will go on to receive opposite-sex hormones, “puberty blockers” and transgender surgeries, which wreak irreversible havoc on the body and provide no mental health benefits.

In a comment opposing the rule change, Americans Advancing Freedom (AAF) claims HHS could incentivize unaccompanied migrant children to identify as nonbinary:

Introducing such children to the concept [of a third gender], which is likely much less common in many of the countries they are fleeing, may actively encourage them to adopt such an identity in hopes that it could give them a “special” advantage to staying in the United States.

In turn, AAF says HHS employees could push nonbinary-identified children toward transgender medical interventions.

The proposal’s nonsensical endorsement of a third gender is harmful, but not surprising. HHS has been pushing gender ideology for years. What is surprising, however, is how blatantly it prioritizes ideologies over the individuals it swears to protect.

HHS places unaccompanied migrant children with American sponsors after the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) or Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) releases them. When a child has been with a sponsor for a month, HHS is supposed to call them and confirm their wellbeing.

HHS failed to reach 85,000 children for these phone calls between 2021 and 2023, The New York Times reports, finding the agency “lost immediate contact” with a third of the kids it had placed with sponsors.

HHS’ top priority should be recovering the tens of thousands of children it lost and preventing it from happening again. Instead, it has spent time and manpower drafting a paperwork proposal making it even harder to identify children who slip through the cracks.

Law enforcement can’t identify missing children without knowing their biological sex.

Compassionate immigration policy requires prioritizing the physical and mental safety of unaccompanied migrant children over nonexistent gender labels. Until HHS prioritizes people over politically correct paperwork, ideology will continue to outrank the children the agency claims to protect.

Additional Articles and Resources

American Immigration System Loses Contact with Tens of Thousands of Migrant Children

Familial DNA Testing on the Southern Border Shouldn’t Have Ended

Doctor Refuses to Publish Major Study Finding Puberty-Blocking Drugs Don’t Help Children

‘Trust the Science’ About ‘Gender-Affirming Care.’ What Science?

American Society of Plastic Surgeons Backs Away From Supporting ‘Transgender’ Surgeries

U.K.’s Review of Child Gender Policy Reveals Profound Failures That U.S. Still Defends

The WPATH Files Exposes ‘Surgical and Hormonal Experiments on Children’

The WPATH Files – Transgender Interventions Are ‘Unethical Medical Experiments’

Laken Riley Murdered After Killer Took Taxpayer-Funded Flight

Laken Riley’s killer will spend the rest of his life in prison, a Georgia judge ruled Wednesday, after convicting him of murder, kidnapping and assault.

Police arrested 26-year-old Jose Ibarra for murder on February 23, a day after discovering the 22-year-old nursing student beaten to death behind the University of Georgia. She had gone missing after her morning run.

Riley’s brutal death became a rallying cry for immigration reform when authorities revealed Ibarra had no reason to be in America. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) detained Ibarra for entering the country illegally in 2022 but released him to await immigration trial. Rumored to be a member of Tren de Aragua, a violent Venezuelan gang, Ibarra committed crimes in New York and Georgia before brutalizing Riley.

Brutal — there’s no better word to describe his actions. An autopsy confirmed Riley had been dragged into the woods and beaten to death with a rock. Heartrate data from the young woman’s smart watch indicates she fought her attacker for 18 minutes before succumbing to her injuries.

Ibarra’s DNA was found under Riley’s fingernails, corresponding to deep scratches observed on Ibarra’s arms, hands and neck. Investigators discovered his fingerprints on Riley’s phone and surveillance cameras captured him disposing of a jacket with Riley’s blood and hair on it.

After closing arguments, Judge Patrick Haggard found Ibarra guilty of malice murder, felony murder, aggravated assault with intent to rape, aggravated battery, hindering a 911 call and tampering with evidence. Ibarra had waived his right to a trial by jury.

Haggard also hit Ibarra with a “Peeping Tom” charge for video evidence showing him trying to break into another student’s apartment just two hours before he attacked Riley.

The prosecution presented persuasive evidence that Ibarra murdered Riley. But trial testimony also revealed new ways authorities grossly enabled Ibarra’s criminal behavior.

Rosebeli Flores-Bello, one of Ibarra’s former roommates, testified that she and Ibarra had traveled from New York to Georgia with a free plane ticket courtesy of New York City — i.e.,  taxpayers.

NYC offers migrants free transportation to the destination of their choice through its “reticketing center.” Flores-Bello claimed she and Ibarra were granted one of these “humanitarian flights” in September 2023 — just one month after New York police charged Ibarra with reckless endangerment of a child.

When an illegal immigrant commits a criminal offense, police can “lodge a detainer,” or transfer custody of the offender to Immigration and Customs Enforcement for deportation. New York police should have lodged a detainer on Ibarra in August 2023. Instead, the city bought him a free plane ticket to the state where he would later commit murder.

New York officials didn’t publicly admit to “relocating” illegal immigrants with government money until a month after it bankrolled Ibarra, and only when a Politico exposé forced them to come clean. Additional digging by outlets like the New York Post revealed the city had been operating reticketing since spring 2022.

Since then, the New York City Mayor’s office claims NYC has provided more than 47,000 illegal immigrants with free transportation — more than 20% of the total number of illegal immigrants the city has hosted.

“Reticketing” fees cost the city $7.6 million in two years, one source told the Post in March. Eight months later, the program has likely cost taxpayers another $2.5 million.

Its unclear, however, exactly which taxpayers are footing the bill. The Post claims NYC uses its federal grants, totaling $156 million, to fund the program. Adams and other state officials do not specify what money pays for the tickets — only that illegal immigrants don’t pay.

Whether New Yorkers or all Americans footed the bill, New York city used hard earned money to transport a known criminal and gang member to a state where he murdered a 22-year-old girl. Now, taxpayers will pay for his life-long incarceration.

In this sad tale, elected leaders and law enforcement failed everyone except Jose Ibarra.

Additional Articles and Resources

Debate Over Immigration Labels Obscures Seriousness of Laken Riley’s Death

Illegal Immigrant to Appear in Court for Death of Texas Teen, Illustrates Violent Trend

Illegal Immigrant Arrested in Murder of Maryland Mom

Laken Riley Act Introduced in Senate

Talking to Your Kids About Illegal Immigration

Familial DNA Testing on the Southern Border Shouldn’t Have Ended

The Border Crisis and the Deafening Silence of Women’s Groups

Election Aftermath: Americans Aren’t Losing Their Rights

Citizens mourning the results of last week’s presidential election are taking to social media, filming and posting reactions including screaming, more intense screaming, “screaming into the abyss,” crying, proclaiming “devastation,” head shaving, name calling, threats of violence and mental breakdowns.

The videos reflect some Americans’ sincere and anguished belief that the coming administration will take away American freedoms — up to and including reinstating slavery. But neither President-elect Trump’s proposed policies nor his campaign rhetoric suggest any American rights are in danger.

Let’s break it down.

Rumors about Mr. Trump taking away women’s rights have to do with abortion. Vice President Kamala Harris repeatedly asserted the President-elect would enforce a national abortion ban “with or without Congress.”

Ironically, the President-elect’s position on abortion has either frustrated or disappointed many pro-life advocates. He opposes late-term abortion and staunchly supports states’ rights to determine their own abortion policy. In October, he claimed he would veto any national abortion ban to protect states’ rights.

These facts did little to dampen the panic surrounding Trump’s supposed “war on women.” In a dire video warning about America’s Trumpian future, comedian Kathy Griffen claimed, “If your son gets a girl pregnant and they’re both fifteen, then you, of course, will force that they marry and keep having as many Duggars as possible.”

“I’m not being hyperbolic,” Griffen doubled down. “I’m not being dramatic.”

The author believes Griffen is, in fact, being hyperbolic and dramatic.

Trump and his allies have never supported, or even floated, marriage contracts or child quotas. Griffen’s predictions are wild extrapolations of a faulty set of facts — and all too representative of the kinds of narratives popping up online and in person.

One high school teacher vented her distress to her students, warning them,

[The Trump administration] is talking about deporting people. If you’re from Central America, they want to deport you. If you’re from South America, they want to deport you. He’s talking about deporting black people back to Africa.

Deportation is part of the Trump administration’s goal to beef-up border security. From fiscal years 2021 to 2024, Customs and Border Patrol agents encountered more than six million illegal immigrants, a 59% increase from the more than two million encountered from fiscal years 2016 to 2019.

A significant number of these arrivals have had criminal records or ties to gangs and terrorist organizations. At least 435,000 of these bad actors have been released into the U.S. to await immigration trial, according to the Department of Homeland Security. In some cases, repeat offenders have been allowed to kill American citizens, including Laken Riley, Lizbeth Medina, Rachel Morin, Jocelyn Nungaray and Kayla Hamilton.

Mr. Trump and his border czar nominee, Tom Homan, say finding and deporting these violent offenders will be priority one, something a teacher of vulnerable students should be excited about. As for deporting black people back to Africa — suffice to say it’s never been part of Trump’s platform.

Also not a part of Trump’s platform? Taking away LGBT “rights” or endorsing violence against LGBT-identified individuals.

The President-elect plans to reinforce some basic protections for biological women, namely restoring the integrity of Title IX and stopping men from participating in women’s sports. He further plans to stop forcing taxpayers to pay for transgender surgeries and keep schools from promoting gender ideology.

These policies are popular with most Americans for reasons the Daily Citizen frequently enumerates. Notably, however, they do not stop a person from being gender confused or pursuing transgender surgeries as an adult and on their own dime.

Neither do these policies incite violence against anyone. If anything, they are a repudiation of violence against women.

Still, on TikTok, one user forcefully opined, “It’s going to be hell on Earth once they strip away everyone’s rights that isn’t a straight, white, cis[gender] man.”

Post-election hysteria illustrates a deeply sad picture of Americans laboring under a lie. No American is losing their rights. Love him or hate him, the election of Donald Trump shouldn’t send anyone into an existential crisis.

Let’s keep it real, folks — and by that, I mean let’s get a grip on reality.

Additional Articles and Resources

Trump’s Promise to Shutter Dept of Education Could End Woke Agenda in Schools

Illegal Immigrant Arrested in Murder of Maryland Mom

Debate Over Immigration Labels Obscures Seriousness of Laken Riley’s Death

Illegal Immigrant to Appear in Court for Death of Texas Teen, Illustrates Violent Trend

Fentanyl Overdoses Rise, Connection to Illegal Immigration

Taxpayers Will Fund Violent Inmate’s Transgender Surgery, Judge Rules

Back to School With Sexualized Lessons

Title IX Redefinition of ‘Sex’ Faces Defiance and a Flood of Lawsuits

Appeals Courts Affirm Rulings Stopping the DOE’s Rewrite of Tilte IX

Huge Title IX Win: Department of Education’s 2021 Interpretation Ruled ‘Unlawful’

Courts Defend Title IX from Department of Health and Human Services