Ivanka Trump blasted for surfing as LA burns after split with Donald over immigration - as celeb pals like Kim Kardashian slam ICE raids
Ivanka Trump is facing sharp criticism for posting surfing snaps on Instagram while Los Angeles was being torn apart by rioting over her father's immigration policies.
The First Daughter has been thrust into an awkward position as she juggles loyalty to family and a blossoming alliance with A-list influencers who have slammed her father's efforts to hunt down and deport illegal immigrants.
Trump's provocative decision to deploy Marines to help wrangle protesters rioting against his immigration policies in LA prompted a wave of celebrity condemnation, led by Ivanka's close friend Kim Kardashian.
The decade-long friendship is well documented and Ivanka is largely credited with helping Kim lobby her father during his first presidency.
But Kim's decision to speak out against Trump's immigration policies has left Ivanka in a tough spot and opened her up to vile criticism for failing to address the saga.
Her latest two Instagram posts have been inundated with cruel comments condemning her silence.
'Ivanka Antoinette. While America burns, she surfs,' one said on a picture of Ivanka holding a surfboard at the beach.
'How ''let them eat cake'' is this post?,' another said.
Trump's provocative decision to send military reinforcements into LA to wrangle protesters who are rioting in the streets against his immigration policies prompted a wave of celebrity condemnation, led by Ivanka's close friend Kim Kardashian
'Ivanka should be mortified, humiliated and embarrassed by her father's heartless actions,' a third wrote, while countless others urged her to 'get her dad under control.'
Back in 2018, a year into her father's first term and when she was a crucial player in the administration, Ivanka addressed Trump's tough-on-borders approach.
'That was a low point for me,' she admitted.
'I felt very strongly about that and I am very vehemently against family separation and the separation of parents and children.'
But Ivanka was quick to point out that immigration matters were out of her remit.
Now that she's got no formal involvement in her father's administration, she appears even less inclined to wade into discussions on the controversial topic.
But Kim K's decision to slam the tactics is likely to put Ivanka in an awkward spot.
'When we witness innocent, hardworking people being ripped from their families in inhumane ways, we have to speak up. We have to do what's right,' Kim wrote.
The decade-long friendship is well documented and Ivanka is largely credited with helping connect the A-lister with her father during his first presidency
'Growing up in LA, I've seen how deeply immigrants are woven into the fabric of this city. They are our neighbors, friends, classmates, coworkers, and family.
'No matter where you fall politically, it's clear that our communities thrive because of the contributions of immigrants. We can't turn a blind eye when fear and injustice keep people from living their lives freely and safely.'
The Department of Homeland Security hit back hours later, with a post on X which read: '@KimKardashian, which one of these convicted child molesters, murderers, drug traffickers and rapists would you like to stay in the country.'
The post was accompanied by photos of four individuals ICE arrested in recent days from the City of Angels.
Kim is one of many celebrities using their platforms to condemn what they consider the heavy-handed approach to tightening border restrictions.
Trump gave the Immigrations and Customs Enforcement agents instructions to ramp up detention activities across the nation as part of his mass deportation agenda.
But raids across the nation have sparked furious backlash, most apparent in LA where rioters have spent six days tearing the city apart in protest against the policies.
Trump responded by authorizing the deployment of 4,100 National Guard troops and 700 Marines.
But Kim appears to be the first celebrity from Ivanka's inner circle to publicly comment on the controversy.
Since stepping back from politics, Ivanka has been embraced by Miami socialites and A-listers, seen mingling with the likes of Camila Coelho, Isabela Grutman and Jeff Bezos' fiance Lauren Sanchez.
Ivanka has also developed close friendships with her sister-in-law Karlie Kloss and supermodel Gisele Bündchen, both of whom have been vocal in the past about their political affiliations and support of immigrants.
In 2020, Kloss told Bravo host Andy Cohen, 'I voted as a Democrat in 2016 and I plan to do the same in 2020', meanwhile Bündchen once replied to a fan's comment on Instagram asking if she was supporting Trump in 2016 with a simple but firm 'NO!'
In 2017, shortly after Trump's first foray into nationality-based immigration bans, Bündchen penned an Instagram post celebrating the diversity of immigrants, tagged: 'weareallimmigrants.'
And Kloss, who is married to Ivanka's husband Jared's billionaire brother, Joshua Kushner, criticized Trump's immigration policies in 2018, urging her fans to call their local congress member to voice their concerns.
'It's not the time to say 'there are no words', there are many. Politicizing the lives of these defenseless children and ripping them from their parents is heartless,' she wrote.
'We have to be the voices for these kids, and I support anyone standing up to do right by them. No matter what side of the aisle you are on - speak up.'
The relationship between the sisters-in-law was initially rumored to be frosty, sources told DailyMail.com back in April that relations had thawed since Ivanka took a step back from politics.
'Ivanka's views have changed and after she revealed she hates politics. Since then, her and Karlie have gotten very close and Karlie and Gisele have been close for over a decade,' a source close to Ivanka said.
'They formed a trio and love spending time with each other. Both Karlie and Gisele - who have been friends for years - have revealed that they are not Trump supporters.'
'Karlie has been very vocal about her political beliefs. Gisele revealed to her fans on social media that she does not support Trump.'
She famously said in January that she 'hated politics', telling The Skinny Confidential podcast: 'I hate politics. It's very dark, negative. And some people love like the gladiator aspect of it: the fight. That was never me.'
From 2016 to 2020 Ivanka was a senior advisor during her father's first term, giving up her life as a socialite and fashion designer and moving her young family from New York City to Washington DC.
But when Trump announced he was running again in 2022, Ivanka took a step back.
'I love my father very much,' she said in a statement at the time, 'I am choosing to prioritize my children and the private life we are creating as a family. I do not plan to be involved in politics.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
30 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Israel is just getting started, but can a weakened Iran respond?
Israel's warplanes were in the air barely two hours after Donald Trump, the US president, had laid out the case for continuing talks with Iran at the weekend. 'We remain committed to a Diplomatic Resolution to the Iran Nuclear Issue,' he posted on his Truth Social site. 'My entire Administration has been directed to negotiate with Iran.' Had Benjamin Netanyahu, the headstrong prime minister of Israel, not got the memo? Or was he sending a clear signal to Washington that he was not going to take orders from anyone. As ever in the Middle East's quagmire of religious strife and decades of power struggles, it was all a lot more complicated than that. The Americans had been forewarned that Israel had run out of patience with Iran and its deadly pursuit of nuclear weapons. Just a day earlier, the State Department had announced it was reducing its diplomatic footprint in Baghdad and other regional facilities, Mr Trump warning the Middle East 'could be a dangerous place'. The US president was asked directly whether Israeli strikes were imminent. 'Well, I don't want to say imminent,' he told reporters in the East Room of the White House, 'but it looks like it's something that could very well happen'. Strikes, he said, could upset delicately poised negotiations. Or, maybe, he mused, it 'might help it actually'. So when explosions echoed across Iran early on Friday morning, Mr Trump and Mr Netanyahu were settling into rather familiar roles. The American president had spent the day as good cop – talking up the idea of a negotiated settlement and trying to keep his people in the region from becoming targets. However, while officials said negotiators were on their way to Oman for a sixth round of talks on Sunday – he was happy to let the Israeli prime minister play the bad cop, pulling the trigger. 'In my assessment, the timing of an Israeli strike on Iran reflects a convergence of interests between Trump and Netanyahu,' said Avi Melamed, a former Israeli intelligence official. 'From Trump's perspective, as long as the US is not directly militarily involved, there is an advantage to a situation in which Israel takes military action aimed at forcing the Iranian regime back to negotiations from a significantly weaker position. 'The one who will pay the price for this move is Israel.' As he announced Operation Rising Lion to his nation, Mr Netanyahu set out the scale of the threat just a few hundred miles away. For decades, the tyrants of Tehran have 'brazenly, openly called for Israel's destruction,' he said, describing how their weapons programme had produced enough highly enriched uranium for nine nuclear bombs. The strikes, said Gabriel Noronha, president of POLARIS National Security and a former adviser to the State Department, were simply the first in maybe a week of attacks, starting with command and control centres, top leadership, and aerospace headquarters that would have launched drone and missile retaliation. The question now is whether Iran will have the ability or the intent to strike US facilities or at any of the 40,000 military personnel in the Persian Gulf and the rest of the Middle East. 'They've threatened the US for a long time,' Mr Noronha said. 'The question is whether they will have the munitions and the capability to strike US bases or they say, 'We barely have enough to inflict damage on Israel. We're going to keep it at that.'' Either way, it is just the start.
Reuters
40 minutes ago
- Reuters
EUROPE Friday 13th brings explosions in Tehran, race to safe havens
A look at the day ahead in European and global markets from Rocky Swift It had to be Friday the 13th, right? The morning began with explosions in Tehran that appeared to be much more serious than tit-for-tat strikes between Israel and Iran last year. Though a preemptive strike by Israel on Iran's budding nuclear capability had been suspected, the timing and severity still took markets by surprise, with oil prices jumping over 11% at one point. What remains unclear is what role or knowledge the United States had about the offensive and what will Washington do if Iran retaliates. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the U.S. was not involved, while Israel's state broadcaster said Washington had been notified before the strikes. Steve Witkoff, President Donald Trump's special envoy to the Middle East, had been expected to meet Iran's foreign minister in Oman on Sunday. Oil's jump, opens new tab put it on course for the sharpest daily gain in more than five years. Gold and Treasuries surged in Asian trading, while stock futures pointed to roughly 1.5% declines in Europe and U.S. Britain's FTSE was down less than 0.5% in the futures market. With rubber bullets flying in Los Angeles and missiles dropping in Tehran, global economies are clearly prioritising guns over butter. Major defence contractors in Europe such as Britain's BAE Systems, France's Dassault Aviation, and Sweden's Saab AB may be active today. Key developments that could influence markets on Friday: - German, French final CPI readings for May - Euro zone trade balance, industrial production data for April Trying to keep up with the latest tariff news? Our new daily news digest offers a rundown of the top market-moving headlines impacting global trade. Sign up for Tariff Watch here.
Reuters
an hour ago
- Reuters
Global nuclear arms spending up 11% in 2024, campaign group says
GENEVA, June 13 (Reuters) - Spending on nuclear weapons by the world's nine nuclear-armed nations rose by 11% in 2024, a report by the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons said on Friday. The $10 billion annual increase to $100.2 billion went towards modernising and in some cases expanding nuclear arsenals, according to ICAN, a global civil society coalition that seeks the total elimination of atomic weapons. "Nuclear-armed countries could have paid the United Nations' budget 28 times with what they spent to build and maintain nuclear weapons in 2024," the report said. The U.S. recorded the largest annual increase in nuclear spending in 2024, rising by $5.3 billion, the report said. Its total expenditure of $56.8 billion exceeded the combined spending of all other nuclear-armed states, it said. China spent $12.5 billion, followed by Britain at $10.4 billion, which was an increase of $2.2 billion, ICAN said. It said the other nuclear-armed states were France, India, Israel, North Korea, Pakistan and Russia. 'In terms of kind of the increase in spending in the UK and France, I think we certainly have seen, at least in the rhetoric of political leaders, a reference to the ongoing war in Ukraine, to the tensions, and that could be playing a role,' Alicia Sanders-Zakre, a policy and research coordinator at ICAN, told reporters at a briefing in Geneva. Britain and other allies in NATO now regard Russia as the main security threat to Europe and some have rolled out plans to devote a higher percentage of GDP to defence spending. However, Sanders-Zakre said the increase in nuclear expenditure has been more driven by the costs of servicing long-term contracts and the growing expense of developing nuclear delivery systems than by current security concerns.
