As we gear up for the 2024 election cycle, it’s clear that major media platforms are swiftly shifting their narrative on Vice President Kamala Harris’ track record, particularly her handling of the crisis at the southern border. Major news outlets such as CNN and Axios are now asserting that Harris was never officially designated as the “border czar” by the Biden administration. This is in stark contrast to their previous reporting which suggested otherwise. This sudden change in tune has triggered a wave of criticism, with detractors accusing these media outlets of glossing over Harris’ shortcomings and setting the stage for her potential presidential run.
Revised Narratives from CNN and Axios
In a recent broadcast, CNN’s Dana Bash stated that Harris “was never and is not the border czar”, directly contradicting reports from 2021 that indicated the Biden administration had welcomed Harris’ appointment to this role. Similarly, Axios published an article suggesting that accusations from the Trump campaign blaming Harris for border failures were misplaced as she was never officially given the title of “border czar”.
However, upon closer inspection, it becomes apparent that Axios itself had previously reported on Harris’ role as a key figure in managing the border crisis. In several articles, they referred to her responsibilities using terms like “border czar”, thereby undermining their current position.
Social Media Backlash
The media’s attempts to rewrite history have not slipped under the radar. Social media users quickly pointed out these discrepancies. One user, Nick Sortor, highlighted how Axios had indeed referred to Harris as the “border czar” in past coverage.
Trump and Republicans Capitalize
This shift in the media narrative has provided an opportunity for President Trump and Republican lawmakers to hold Harris accountable for the administration’s shortcomings at the border. Trump himself criticized Harris, asserting that she had been assigned as the “border czar” and presided over a rise in illegal immigration and migrant-related crimes.
Representative Elise Stefanik (R-NY) introduced a resolution condemning Harris for her role in allowing millions of migrants to cross the southern border illegally during the Biden administration.
Harris’ Supporters Rush to Her Defense
In response to these attacks, allies of Harris have come forward to defend her, suggesting that her role was more diplomatic, similar to Biden’s during the Obama administration, rather than being a “border czar”.
Jeh Johnson, former Secretary of Homeland Security, told Fox News that Harris “is not the border czar”, despite previous statements from the administration and media reports suggesting otherwise.
Contradictory Statements from Harris
Further adding to the confusion are contradictory statements made by Harris herself about her involvement with the border crisis. In an interview with USA Today, she claimed, “We’ve been to the border,” only for it to be pointed out by the reporter that she had not actually visited.
When pressed further on this issue, Harris responded with an evasive remark: “And I haven’t been to Europe. I don’t understand the point you’re making.” This dismissive response has only intensified perceptions of her disengagement with critical issues like border security.
If illegal immigration continues to be a pressing concern for voters, Harris’ handling of this crisis could become a significant stumbling block in her potential 2024 campaign.
Erosion of Public Trust
The contradictory reporting and perceived attempts to sanitize Harris’ record have further eroded public trust in mainstream news outlets. Accusations of bias and political agenda-setting are becoming increasingly common as the public grapples with the realization that even media’s own reporting can be selectively revised to fit a particular narrative.
Leave a Comment