CNN panel descends into chaos after discussion on immigration gets heated
The most contentious moment of the night came when "The View" host Ana Navarro made a comment on illegal immigration versus slavery, which did not land well with CNN contributor Shermichael Singleton.
"There's a hell of a lot of people, other than the Black people who were brought here as slaves, who came to this country illegally. There are a lot of different - " Navarro attempted to explain before being interrupted by Singleton.
Singleton, who is African-American, took issue with Navarro's statement and sharply replied, "They are not the same as Black people who were brought here against our will."
Scott Jennings Responds To Reports That He May Run For Kentucky's Us Senate Seat
Navarro insisted her point was misunderstood, but Singleton remained emphatic, asserting, "There's a big difference."
Read On The Fox News App
Phillip attempted to de-escalate the situation, suggesting that Singleton misheard what Navarro had said, but it didn't work.
"No, he purposely misheard it," Navarro shot back.
"I purposely misheard? So now you're in my brain?" he asked.
The host once again tried to calm the pair down, to no avail.
Navarro described herself as someone who always advocated for Black people and she objected to the idea that such a person would make a comment disparaging African Americans.
"Because you've advocated for Black people. Great. Congratulations. Last time I checked, I'm Black. You're not," Singleton responded.
'View' Co-host Who Supported Harris Says She Made Big Mistake Reaching Out To Republicans
Navarro, seemingly irked by Singleton's response, replied, "That's right. I'm Latino, and my people are being racially profiled. And unfairly treated."
Singleton once again pushed back on Navarro, asking if he had to remind her of the history of his own people.
Phillip, having lost control of the panel, decided to end the segment and cut to break.
As she was delivering her closing to the segment, the two could still be heard loudly arguing off camera.
Abrego Garcia's alleged MS-13 gang affiliation was another hot button topic for the panel, with Phillip once again having to jump in and cool the panel down.
"Effectively, what you all are arguing for, passionately, and what Democrats are passionately arguing for, is for the president of the United States to re-import a dangerous member of a transnational terrorist organization who has clear affiliations with a gang that commits heinous atrocities," Jennings said. "That is not what he was elected to do."
Jennings continued, attempting to explain "the politics" behind the Abrego Garcia case, and why he believes Democrats are fighting a losing battle.
'Maryland Man' Kilmar Abrego Garcia Exposed In Police Records As 'Violent' Repeat Wife Beater
"I'm just going to explain to you the politics of this through telling you what the speaker of the House, Hakeem Jeffries, did today, which is that he told his members, 'Please, for the love of God, stop going to El Salvador and dying on this hill,'" Jennings said. "The politics of this could not be worse for the left and worse for Democrats, because the president knows he was elected to protect us from MS-13. And that is what they are doing."
Navarro claimed none of what Jennings said has been proven, which led the CNN contributor to ask Navarro what she thought of Abrego Garcia's alleged MS-13 gang tattoos.
"I say that what Trump said yesterday was an absolute lie," she responded, referencing Trump's ABC interview on Wednesday where he claimed the deported Salvadoran migrant had MS-13 gang tattoos on his hand.
"Are you saying the MS-13 that Donald Trump claims are legitimate tattoos on this guy are true? Are you saying the Photoshop is true?" Navarro asked Jennings.
The pair continued arguing about the semantics of whether Abrego Garcia's tattoos were actually MS-13 related before Phillip stepped in and ended the conversation.
Abrego Garcia's alleged gang affiliation continued to be a point of contention for the panel, with Singleton becoming especially irritated after struggling to get a word in edgewise over the constant crosstalk.
Jennings later questioned the panel on why the United States could let "20 million people into the country," but when it comes to deporting those who entered illegally, "we have to individually pick out every single person and go through years upon years of paperwork and this and that and the other."
Navarro and CNN columnist Raul Reyes took issue with this question and quickly moved to dismiss Jennings' assertion that Democrats are working to "gum up" the Trump administration's efforts to deport those who've illegally entered the country.
Click Here For The Latest Media And Culture News
"That's not true," Navarro shot back, with Reyes adding, "CNN polling shows 54% of Americans want Mr. Abrego Garcia back."
Jennings, over crosstalk from the panel, reminded them the American people voted Trump into office to carry out the agenda he ran on.
Singleton jumped into the discussion and pointed out that as a sovereign nation, people from other countries aren't allowed to illegally enter the United States whenever they want.Original article source: CNN panel descends into chaos after discussion on immigration gets heated
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Miami Herald
21 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
Why the surprise over Scots' reaction to Trump? Respect must be earned
Re: Mary Anna Mancuso's Aug. 1 op-ed, 'Scotland's protests should concern every American.' Why is she surprised by the Scots' reaction to President Trump's visit? What does she expect? Respectfully disagreeing with Trump gets one libeled on his online platform. Continuing to disagree gets one taken to court (and paying for that may require filing for bankruptcy). If one continues to strongly disagree, then threats of bodily harm against one and one's family begin. And when one is physically assaulted, Trump and his people laugh! The Scots are only giving Trump what he gave them: insults. His Scottish neighbors protested how he ran roughshod over the environment surrounding his golf courses, his attempts to stop energy-producing windmills from spoiling his view and his superior attitude toward them. They actually have to live with the results of his schemes. To get respect, one has to earn it. Threatening everyone who refuses to bow down to you won't earn you any respect. Corey Mass, Miami Beach Senate's carelessness In early 1972, I accepted an appointment by then-U.S. Sen. Edward J. Gurney of Florida to serve as an attorney to the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee. I traveled to Washington with aspirations of improving the federal judicial system. Then Watergate broke out. During the next two years, while assisting Gurney, who served on the Judiciary and Watergate Committees, I had a worm's eye view of the tumult, including revelations great and terrible. I witnessed young men of great promise and ability go to jail, but I also watched the testimony of Elliott Richardson and Bill Ruckleshouse, who resigned office rather than carry out an order they deemed wrong (if not legally, then morally). It made me realize that principles matter and that our government requires constant loyalty to the Constitution and the rule of law. Today, I see many parallels to the Watergate years, particularly when young lawyers disregard ethical considerations to further political ends, as by counseling defiance of court orders. Yet one distinction glares: during Watergate, the Senate joined the courts in investigating wrongdoing. I have every confidence today's courts will suffice under the doctrine of separation of powers, as federal judges are demonstrating daily, regardless who appointed them. I also have confidence that our military will withstand attempts to politicize it. However, it surely would help if the Senate were as concerned with the Constitution and the usurpation of their powers as they are with just getting reelected. R. Thomas Farrar, Miami Multiple articles have been published about the horrific boating accident last week on Biscayne Bay. Many of them referred to which boat had the 'right of way.' This terminology is misleading. On water, no boat has the 'right of way.' There is the 'give-way vessel,' which must take action to avoid a collision, or yield the right of way. There also is the stand-on vessel, which is supposed to maintain course. However, if it appears that the give-way vessel is not taking appropriate or adequate action to avoid a collision, the stand-on vessel then has the responsibility to maneuver to avoid a collision. While this might seem like semantics, it is important for all individuals operating a boat to know and understand. As has been mentioned in several articles, the determination of the give-way vessel and stand-on vessel varies based on many situations. Boating is a wonderful activity. Over the past few years, there have been many new recreational boat owners on our South Florida waters. Hopefully, they have been thoroughly educated in boating safety and operation and take care to avoid accidents. None of this will bring comfort to the victims and families of the recent tragedy, but education and knowledge will hopefully prevent future incidents. Seth Rosen, Pinecrest As a former high school social studies teacher, I would have to give Gov. Ron DeSantis a failing grade in American history and an A+ in making it up as he goes along. His 'civics excellence' program for Florida teachers is full of flat out lies, delusions, distortions and derangements, which fit very well within the core curriculum of his role model in the White House. Reconstructing the past to fit a delirious present is a slippery slope and depends on the assumption that Floridians are as ignorant as their chief executive. If that is the case, Florida has much larger problems than its residents can possibly comprehend. A search and destroy mission against the truth will have major unintended consequences. Undermining democracy requires the proper combination of fake news and fake history. Good luck with that recipe, Chef Ron. Craig Corsini, San Rafael, CA Last week's departure of ABC from WPLG Channel 10, after seven decades of affiliation, is quite alarming. I am old enough to remember when there was no ABC, but a Blue Network which was part of NBC, before breaking off into two networks. Apparently, Disney, which now owns ABC, offered less programming and higher fees, according to WPLG, hence their breakup. I also remember Disney when it was just happy producing films, then theme parks and now controlling Paramount and a broadcast network. Maybe Mickey is getting too big for his britches. Roger Shatanoff, Coral Gables In the Aug. 1 op-ed, 'Red states lead the charge to healthier living,' a Heritage Foundation analyst asserts that Florida's fluoride ban is an example of states' political and cultural realignments that will 'begin to change the health trajectory for their constituents.' True, but not in a good way. Why would anyone desire a political legacy that includes rotting kids' teeth? Bob Ross, Pinecrest As a high school senior who actively rides the Metrorail, I've been following the Miami Herald's recent stories on the impact of construction delays on local traffic. According to a July 7 report, the Future-Ready Modernization in Action plan to expand Miami International Airport will result in a 20 million passenger increase by 2040. Even though 2,240 additional parking spaces are planned to accommodate this growth, it's unclear that our roads can absorb the increase in rental cars, taxis and Ubers. Projects like the Signature Bridge will increase highway capacity; however, the completion date has been delayed by two years. Short-term solutions should be made available to daily commuters. We should use something like Miami-Dade's 'Better Bus Plan.' I took Metrorail to school using this six-week, fare-free promotion. It was clean, efficient and reduced my commute. Charles Holleman, Miami The detention center dubbed 'Alligator Alcatraz,' hosted by Gov. Ron DeSantis, President Trump and their own military with cult followers, mirrors what Argentina experienced during its period of dictatorship. That regime's detention center/prison held in isolation those it snatched from daily life, then deported them. Without human rights, legal process or outside communication, detainees were drugged, abused and tortured. Pregnant women were allowed to live until after giving birth. In some cases, their babies were given to military officers' families wanting a child. View some of the documentaries about Argentina's 'Dirty War' to understand our own political unrest. Our political climate is repeating this history. Are U.S. citizens so blinded with loyalty to this type of leadership, or lack thereof, not to realize the destruction to our Constitution? It's time to take back control of public education, fact-based news and publications and the judicial system. Reel in religious institutions that spew hate and white supremacy in preaching while enjoying a tax-free platform. Jail the real criminals. Kimberly Cole, Kendall
Boston Globe
21 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Immigrant police officers have made our communities stronger
Get The Gavel A weekly SCOTUS explainer newsletter by columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr. Enter Email Sign Up NYPD pallbearers carry the casket of slain NYPD officer Didarul Islam during his funeral at Parkchester Jame Masjid on July 31, 2025 in the Parkchester neighborhood of the Bronx borough in New York City. Michael M. Santiago/Getty Advertisement Generations of immigrants have embraced that mission. As Chuck Wexler, head of the Police Executive Research Forum, a Washington-based think tank, That melting pot mentality has also been good for law enforcement. As Wexler also noted, 'Officer Islam is part of a long history of immigrants improving American communities through policing.' Advertisement In policing, diversity is not a curse; it is a positive force. For example, More recently, Wexler's post cites other examples in police departments around the country where immigrants contribute greatly to the communities they serve. Some, like Islam, died in the line of duty. When tragedy strikes, the police officer is a hero. Their country of origin is important only because it shows the starting point of an officer's life and how much they were willing to risk in service to their new country — everything. We live in a time of great suspicion and hostility toward immigrants in every walk of life. Police are on the frontlines, caught between the actions of masked federal agents who snatch people off the streets and the communities whose trust they need in order to do their job. Advertisement Police, he said, are totally supportive of a focus on violent offenders who are here illegally — however, trust with immigrant communities is threatened when you arrest those who have been working here for 20 years, at a wide range of jobs that make them an integral part of their cities and towns. With that comes concern people will be afraid to come forward to either report crime or serve as witnesses. Today's domestic violence incident could be tomorrow's homicide. Wexler believes it is the job of Congress to come up with a solution. 'Instead of comprehensive immigration reform, it has been left to ICE and police to do what Congress isn't able to do,' he told me. Police should not be feared by immigrants who have committed no crime other than coming to this country. Nor should it take the death of a police officer for people to value the promise of immigrants who come here seeking a better life, like Islam and his family. But it does. Advertisement We should never forget that we are a country of proud immigrants — some of whom, like Islam, die in service to that country. Thousands of members of the NYPD and other law enforcement agencies attended the funeral of Officer Didarul Islam on July 31, 2025, who was killed during a mass shooting while working a private security detail assignment in midtown Manhattan. Michael M. Santiago/Getty Joan Vennochi is a Globe columnist. She can be reached at
Axios
21 minutes ago
- Axios
What Abbott can do about Texas Dems leaving the state
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) vowed to remove quorum-busting lawmakers from their seats — and even waved the possibility of felony charges — but legal experts say the governor's pronouncements lean more toward political theater than legal certainty. Why it matters: Abbott's threats reflect the growing tension over legislative gridlock in Texas, in this case about a rare effort to draw new congressional districts midway through the decade. State of play: More than 50 Democrats have once again broken quorum, denying Republicans the numbers they need to advance their redistricting process. In a letter to Democrats on Sunday, Abbott argued that their quorum break "amounts to an abandonment or forfeiture of an elected state office," pointing to a non-binding opinion from Attorney General Ken Paxton. The governor also said any Democrat who "solicits, accepts or agrees to accept" funds to assist their absence "may have violated bribery laws." What they're saying: Andrew Cates, a campaign finance and ethics attorney based in Central Texas, says those threats are largely toothless without court action. "The letter was useful for the governor in its shock value and not so much in its legal ramifications," Cates tells Axios. "There's no executive power that allows the governor or the attorney general to simply declare a seat vacated." How it works: Texas House rules allow absent legislators to be arrested by the sergeant-at-arms, but the enforcement powers apply only within the state. "That's why they always flee to places like Oklahoma or Illinois," Cates said. "There's no mechanism to force their return from out of state." Flashback: Democrats last broke quorum in 2021, when more than 50 lawmakers flew to D.C. during a special session to try to kill a wide-ranging GOP election bill, which ultimately passed. Zoom in: Paxton's non-binding opinion, which suggests that lawmakers who leave the state could be considered to have vacated their seats, acknowledges that the decision must be made by a judge. The attorney general would need to initiate a quo warranto suit and prove that a lawmaker committed an act that "by law, causes a forfeiture of office," Cates said. But it could be difficult to prove in court that Democrats have intentionally vacated their seats because of the law's definition of abandonment, Cates says, adding: "They're using the House rules to make a legislative maneuver." Yes, but: The real test for Democrats will likely come down to cost and public opinion. Democrats will incur a fine of $500 per day for their absence. "More than anything, all of this is a (public relations) battle," Cates says. "As soon as they see people saying, 'This is no longer productive. You guys need to get back to work,' then they'll come back."
