CBS News ran a misleading “60 Minutes” segment attacking the Trump administration’s border enforcement efforts.
CBS’ 60 Minutes pushed a false narrative that separating families at the border was a policy put in place by the Trump Administration, when in fact, at least two previous administrations have held children separately from illegal immigrant adults under some circumstances.
“60 Minutes irresponsibly aired flawed reporting, which displayed disregard for the truth and a fundamental misunderstanding of our nation’s immigration system and the Administration’s zero-tolerance policy for prosecuting illegal border crossers,” said Katie Waldman, a spokeswoman for the Department of Homeland Security in a press statement. “DHS chose not to participate in the taping of this hit piece as it was clear from the start this was an agenda-driven work of revisionist fiction. The piece inaccurately conflated the responsibilities of the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Health and Human Services — the former apprehends illegal aliens (including minors) for illegal acts and the latter is responsible for care and custody of unaccompanied alien minors.
The 60 Minutes piece misled viewers and didn’t convey properly the fact that the Trump Administration followed the same practices followed in the past, that adults and minors were separated in cases where the adult posed a danger to the child or the adult was being prosecuted for a crime and transferred to a facility not appropriate for the child.
“Additionally, 60 Minutes was complicit in allowing one interviewee to peddle absurd fabrications about the actions of the men and women of the U.S. Border Patrol as they carried out the Administration’s zero-tolerance policy,” Waldman continued. “The best 60 Minutes could do to support its inaccurate story was to include commentary from a disgruntled former DHS employee and agenda-driven political appointees from the last administration. This piece did not result from real journalism with robust fact-checking. Instead, it simply served as a platform for the misleading narratives of open-borders advocates.”