Staff Reports
The media has entered a summer of discontent, and the latest episode in this saga involves an amusingly desperate attempt to rewrite history regarding Kamala Harris’s role at the southern border. After the recent debate that showcased Joe Biden’s mental frailty, the press has been scrambling to rehabilitate their favorite vice president, albeit with comical missteps. In a newfound campaign to distance Kamala Harris from her so-called position as “Border Czar,” the narrative being pushed paints her as a mere diplomat, a title more befitting for someone presenting at a cocktail party than handling a national crisis.
The New York Times has now issued a declaration that Harris was never actually given the title of Border Czar, a rebranding employed to sidestep the undeniable reality: responsibility for the chaos at the border lies with her. This effort seems to stem from an acute awareness that the immigration crisis is sinking her campaign, much like an anchor tied to a concrete block. Rather than confront the embers of their long-held claims, certain media outlets have chosen instead to play the blame game, asserting that the title in question was merely a fiction generated by those on the right.
Media Claims Kamala Was Never Border Czar – Except When They Called Her “Border Czar”https://t.co/kVShsAQPxE
"Everybody in the media referred to her as border czar, including the New York Times, which reported Harris replaced previous border czar Roberta Jacobson." pic.twitter.com/x5ND3RS8Wr
— Nevada News & Views (@NevadaNewsViews) July 25, 2024
While the press tries to rewrite their own history, cleverly dismissing their previous assertions that definitively referred to Harris as the Border Czar, they overlook a crucial truth of this narrative: the vice president herself took on significant responsibilities regarding border control. Back in March 2021, she was publicly introduced as leading the administration’s diplomatic efforts with Central American countries, targeting the very issues driving migration to the United States. The feeble claims to disassociate her from this role fall flat when juxtaposed with her public acknowledgment of overseeing border policy initiatives.
Moreover, further reports from the New York Times reinforce that, although she might not have been anointed “Border Czar,” she effectively absorbed the duties of Roberta Jacobson, the actual appointee for that role. When Jacobson announced her retirement shortly after Harris’s appointment, it became clear that the vice president was stepping into a void created by her predecessor. To suggest that Harris was not holding the reins of border policy during this period is a display of intellectual gymnastics few would take seriously. The timeline and transitions tell the real tale, even if the press wishes otherwise.
The operational reality surrounding Harris’s involvement remains murky, especially amid a continuously spiraling immigration crisis marked by unprecedented numbers of undocumented arrivals and a lack of accountability for those numbers. Attempting to partition her responsibilities into the category of mere diplomacy does little to address the chaos unfolding at the U.S.-Mexico border. With record surges in illegal crossings and crime tied to border issues, pretending that Harris has escaped the fallout is both laughable and disingenuous.
As the media rushes to offload blame, it is all too apparent that Kamala Harris is still very much at the center of this debacle. The effort to dilute her involvement while simultaneously projecting her into a role of importance will likely only serve to lead the public to question the integrity of information being peddled. If there’s one role Harris seems to excel at, it’s being the poster child for a border strategy that has, quite frankly, left many wondering how she maintains any claim to credibility.
