close

Politics - News Analysis

NYT Faces Backlash for Referring to Ivanka and Jared as ‘Refugees’ Because it Offends REAL Refugees

By

Yesterday we reported on the fact that no one in Manhattan wants Jared and Ivanka living anywhere near them. They are not welcome in a city that lost perhaps as many as 30,000 people due to COVID and perhaps some due to Jared’s brilliant political idea: Dump it on the governor and call it a blue state problem. Because god knows a virus isn’t going to spread or anything. The virus had already made it from a big city in China to the other side of the world but it wasn’t going to get from New York City to Ohio – a reliably red state.

Anyway, that’s not the point. The point is that the New York Times wrote: “The end of President Trump’s time in office leaves his daughter Ivanka Trump and his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, as well-t0-do refugees — but they appear to have plans in New Jersey.”

We confess, we went right over it focusing more on the fact that simply “allowing” COVID to fester in their hometown was not something easily forgiven. We skipped right over the offensive use of rich refugees which is a contradiction in terms. A refugee is defined as: “a person who has been forced to leave their country in order to escape war, persecution, or natural disaster,” according to Google.

Obviously, Ivanka and Jared are not refugees.

But it allows us to clear one thing up. Trump took pride in saying the border was “closed” to everyone. Except everyone is not the same. It is against the law for someone from Mexico or some other stable state to sneak across the border. The law says they must go back, deported. But many people were not doing this – including people in “the caravan” that didn’t exist.

The different ones were refugees. Refugees walked right up to the border and presented themselves to Customs as refugees, mostly from Guatemala and El Salvador, countries that were tremendously dangerous due to war and gangs.

The Geneva Convention requires all countries that signed the agreement (all reputable nations did) agreed that if refugees presented themselves to the border of a signee, that country would grant that refugee a hearing, in which they would prove or not they qualified. If they did, they were permitted to live in the signee country until the situation in their homeland became safe. Obviously many simply became citizens in whatever country they sought.

Trump started by treating these people awfully, including taking children (something that could be considered a crime against humanity) and eventually violated the Geneva Convention by simply turning them around and saying “Stay in Mexico” even though there’s no rule that people have to stay in the first signee they crossed, only prove that they had the right to refugee status.

Short story long, many of these people were not violating the law. Many of them were following the law to the letter and depended upon the word of the United States. It didn’t matter under Trump and not under ICE as it’s currently constituted.

Sorry if that bit seems … obvious to many or known by everyone, but we’ve talked to many that didn’t know the technical difference.

Ivanka and Jared may well be looking for a home, but they aren’t refugees. We missed it, too.

Take a look at the Twitter outrage:

****

Peace, y’all
Jason
[email protected] and on Twitter @JasonMiciak

Jason Miciak
meet the author

Jason Miciak is a political writer, features writer, author, and attorney. He is originally from Canada but grew up in the Pacific Northwest. He now enjoys life as a single dad raising a ridiculously-loved young girl on the beaches of the Gulf Coast. He is very much the dreamy mystic, a day without learning is a day not lived. He is passionate about his flower pots and studies philosophical science, religion, and non-mathematical principles of theoretical physics. Dogs, pizza, and love are proof that God exists. "Above all else, love one another."

Comments

Comments are currently closed.

Recent Stories

Trending Stories