Did you hear about the Egyptian family being cruelly targeted by the Trump administration, for some reason?
Well, at least that’s the impression created by a Texas Tribune social media post published last weekend. The news organization, which boasts of its “nonpartisan newsroom” tasked with “informing” Texans, framed the story this way: “An Egyptian family of six believed to be the longest held at the controversial South Texas Family Residential Center in Dilley were redetained Saturday after federal judges this week ordered their release. They are being sent to Egypt on a private plane, according to one of the family’s lawyers.”
The news story is accompanied by artwork drawn by a young child in the family, featuring six human figures asking, “When will we go home?”
Heartstrings, pulled.
Why, pray tell, did this family become the longest held at a “controversial” facility? And why have they been marked for repatriation? Wait for it.
The article informs readers in an updated lead that the family has been released again, following an order from a judge. The family’s attorney is quoted early in the story, referring to the episode as a “dark moment in U.S. history.” The story notes that the family’s “re-detention ignited widespread criticism by advocates and some congressional Democrats,” one of whom called the development “outrageous,” asserting that it “undermines the rights of every American.”
Sixteen paragraphs into the original story — it appears an updated version adds a brief, sanitized mention closer to the top — the “why” finally makes an appearance. And it’s a doozy:
The El Gamal family, who came to the U.S. on a tourist visa in 2022 and later applied for asylum, had been detained since June after the father, Mohamed Sabry Soliman, was charged with attacking mostly Jewish protesters in Boulder, Colorado, accused of throwing Molotov cocktails at demonstrators supporting Israeli hostages. He allegedly wounded at least 29 people and an 82-year-old woman died from her injuries. The father, who pleaded not guilty, remains in federal custody on more than 100 charges related to the incident.
Dad is a “globalize the intifada” terrorist. Dad firebombed Jews at a Colorado vigil for hostages stolen by Hamas. Dad murdered a Holocaust survivor.
This information arrives 16 paragraphs into the original story, well after all sorts of sympathetic scaffolding had been erected. The piece assures readers that the family says they are estranged from the terrorist, noting that the others have not been charged with crimes. Is it now the “progressive” position that foreign nationals can come to America on tourist visas, file legally dubious asylum claims, then stay indefinitely, even after an immediate family member commits a deadly terrorist attack on U.S. soil?
One might argue that even if none of the rest of the family had anything to do with the murderous assault against Jews, it is vital to send a message that foreign nationals who come to America and attack our people will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, and that their relatives, who are guests in our country, will not be permitted to stay.
Writer and attorney AG Hamilton asks the pertinent question: “The entire framing [of the Tribune article] also emphasizes the problem with our system. They were here on a tourist visa. They tried to stay based on an obviously bogus asylum claim (zero evidence of legitimate fear presented). The dad commits a heinous terrorist act and yet people, including news outlets, pretend like they are entitled to stay. On what basis? You aren’t entitled to be in America just because you want to be.”
Indeed, on what basis?
And if elected Democrats are going to serve up quotes about the supposedly grave injustice being done here — the family is still here, by the way, because at least one judge said so, proving how hard no-brainer deportations have become — let them offer an affirmative case for why the tourist-visa terrorist’s family should remain in the United States indefinitely. I’m not sure they can, though a political movement that can defend or even celebrate the ongoing presence of an alleged wife-beating, human-trafficking, child-porn-soliciting gang member and illegal immigrant seems capable of justifying almost anything on this front.
I’ll leave you with one more note about the Texas Tribune’s immigration coverage. Last week, the paper ran a story about how “immigrants with DACA were protected from deportation, but since Trump’s return, the government has arrested nearly 300 DACA recipients, including 75 in Texas.”
DACA recipients are also known as “Dreamers” — illegal immigrants brought to the U.S. at a young age. They are perhaps the most sympathetic group of illegal immigrants. The Texas Tribune blares that the Trump administration has now arrested nearly 300 of them. The story is filled with requisite incensed quotes from Democrats and tear-jerking tableaus presented for the preferred narrative. Slightly alluded to, but absent, is the “why” behind the arrests in question.
That answer was helpfully furnished by Fox News correspondent Bill Melugin, citing DHS data: “250 out of 270 (92%) of the DACA recipients had criminal convictions or pending criminal charges.”
Seems relevant, no?
BAN GERRYMANDERING? HOLD YOUR HORSES
Especially because the sensible agreement most Americans support, as established by the Obama administration, is that DACA recipients get to stay as long as they respect our laws and keep their noses clean. Once criminal charges and convictions enter the picture, the equation changes, as it should. But even if one does not agree that it should, for whatever reason, any responsible news coverage of the issue should at least include the statistics provided by Melugin.
If the Texas Tribune prefers to engage in propaganda and activism, it might want to rebrand, because that’s not the behavior of a “nonpartisan newsroom” genuinely dedicated to “informing” anybody.