Katie Miller made a veiled threat to deport a political commentator during a heated debate about New York mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani on Thursday.

The wife of White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller appeared on a panel of commentators on “Piers Morgan Uncensored.” While arguing with The Young Turks co-creator Cenk Uygur, the debate quickly turned ugly. The shouting match devolved into Miller questioning the validity of Uygur’s U.S. citizenship application.

Miller accused Uygur of “racist, bigoted rhetoric” around Israel and Uygur countered that Miller was a habitual liar. When Cenk floated the idea that Israel got a “pass” on committing genocide against Palestinians, Miller wondered if the Trump administration might need to take a closer look at his recently granted citizenship.

Miller cut in. “You better check your citizenship application and make sure everything is correct,” she said. “Because you’ll be just like Ilhan Omar.”

  • bluesocks@lemmings.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    7 hours ago

    “How dare you make me look stupid for supporting a corrupt regime!?”

    I swear, the guillotines can’t come fast enough for these fuckers.

  • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    38
    ·
    17 hours ago

    Why is Stephen Miller’s wife given air time? Who the fuck cares what she thinks?

    If a News agency can’t get ahold of a scientist for an interview are they going to talk to the scientist’s spouse? “The head of the fire department is busy with the wildfires so we asked their date from last week about the plan moving forward…”

    • Plurrbear@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      15 hours ago

      Giving her air time is just another distraction from the Epstein Files and the fact that Project 25 is still going on… remember when Drumpf said he didn’t even know Miller?!?!

      SANE, critical thinking Americans remember! The administration is nothing but blatant liars full of distractions, and protecting each other while being pedofiles stealing money from tax payers!

      I legit am a server and made over $2200 this paycheck but only took home a little over $1600… wtf!

      IF THE GOVT IS SHUTDOWN WHY THE FUCK AM I PAYING TAXES AND HOW THE FUCK YOU GONNA TAKE THAT MUCH FROM ME?!?! (Let alone that much in taxes, thought cash tips weren’t taxed… FUCKING LIES).

      FUCK AMERICA! SHOW US THE EPSTEIN FILES!!! Ps FUCK ICE!

  • xxce2AAb@feddit.dk
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    154
    ·
    2 days ago

    “My arguments are shit, so I’ll just have to resort to violence. Except I’m too chicken-shit for that too, so I’ll see if I can’t get someone else to hurt you on my behalf.”

  • hotdogcharmer@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 day ago

    Wow, she looks like a bruiser. It’s funny cos he looks like a weasely little bastard. Just two absolutely fucking hideous slabs of meat, made uglier by their permanently sneering expressions and made impossible to stand by their eternally cruel actions.

    May the happy couple get what they deserve 🤞

    • BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      1 day ago

      Her husband PeeWee Himmler is so repellant that the when MAGA entered the White House in 2020, the word was that he was a virgin who had never been on a date.

      She apparently comes from a wealthy family, who reportedly uses the n-word at the dinner table routinely. She was a White House staffer when they met, and bonded over their love of Zyklon B.

      She will definitely order her husband Wormtongue to investigate Cenk.

        • BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 hours ago

          Public Domain, have at it.

          Also PeeWee Mengele. Guess who that is?

          PeeWee Himmler also resembles PeeWee Wormtongue, whispering poison into his King’s ear, making him lean into his worst, most evil instincts.

  • Archangel1313@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    59
    ·
    1 day ago

    “Because you’ll be just like Ilhan Omar.”

    Uh…wut? Anyone have some context for this bit of crazy?

      • lobut@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        1 day ago

        Just like Obama’s birth certificate. People love pretending they’re not racist when they’re obviously racist.

          • humorlessrepost@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            6 minutes ago

            I’ve been mistaken for “safe” plenty of times. They still don’t self-identify as racist. They’ll say things like “the blacks are just genetically more violent and love to rape, and we need to protect ourselves by keeping them out of our town”, but that’s not “racist” because they’re “just telling the facts” that the libs try to force society to ignore. They think it’s equivalent to saying women tend to have less facial hair, which isn’t sexist, so they’re not being racist.

        • ubergeek@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          1 day ago

          Because it’s far too easy to point out that Melania lied on her citizenship application, and she would be deported under that idea, too.

          Not that Trump would mind. It would enable him to start fucking his daughter, or Laura Loomer.

          • Hemingways_Shotgun@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            ·
            24 hours ago

            It would enable him to start fucking his daughter, or Laura Loomer.

            Marriage has never stopped him before. I wouldn’t expect it would now.

          • tal@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            21 hours ago

            It would enable him to start fucking his daughter

            I don’t think that Melania’s presence stateside has anything to do with the legality of Trump having sex with his daughter.

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_incest_in_the_United_States

            In all but two states (and the special case of Ohio, which “targets only parental figures”),[1] incest is criminalized between consenting adults. In New Jersey and Rhode Island, incest between consenting adults (16 or over for Rhode Island, 18 or over for New Jersey) is not a criminal offense, though marriage is not allowed in either state. New Jersey also increases the severity of underage sex offenses by a degree if they are also incestuous, and also criminalizes incest with 16-17 year olds (the normal age of consent in New Jersey is 16). Ohio allows incest between consenting adults only when one party is not a parental figure (see table below) to the other.

            So, that’d work in Rhode Island or New Jersey, as long as they don’t marry, but I don’t think that the public in either of those two states is too keen on Trump.

            EDIT: For context, note that I’m assuming that ubergeek is referencing this:

            He’s previously called her hot, saying she had the “best body” and speaking on The View even said “if Ivanka weren’t my daughter, perhaps I’d be dating her.”

  • Chozo@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    84
    ·
    2 days ago

    Eva Braun 2.0 over here really ought to consider following her predecessor’s footsteps.

    • ameancow@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      22 hours ago

      Liberals and leftists may believe this, but the sad reality of our species is that we’re not a logical creature, and at the end of the day, we care far, far more about interpersonal perceptions and feelings than we do about consistency or logical, fair argument.

      And this is really serious, we have to understand this better. We have a minority of the population running roughshod over entire nations and constitutions and even the social contract because the only way we know how to engage with them and fight them is with consistent, good-faith debate, meanwhile on their end, they care far more about aesthetics, appearances, skin color and accent, superficial attitude and beliefs than they do being called out for inconsistency.

      This is the Kayfabe Crew, they willingly and knowingly will believe things they know to be untrue because it’s more important to them how they feel than what they know. They have made this choice and our inability to engage them on this level has created walls that will keep us from having success.

      Let us all remember and mourn the days that Tim Waltz was calling them “weird” and making more political waves for it than years of statistics and data and debate, before being muzzled by the democratic party for not being a boring shade of inoffensive grey.

    • snooggums@piefed.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 day ago

      Racists tend to see an attack on their racist arguments as an attack on themselves since their racism is intertwined with their identity.

      • wheezy@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        1 day ago

        Too many people online love to use “ad hominem” as a defense when someone uses language like: “you’re stupid and here is why…”

        Not saying that’s what’s done here. It’s not. I just feel like the only time I see people use “logical fallacies” like this is incorrectly.

        Ad hominem is NOT when someone insults someone they are arguing with. It’s when they use the insult or personal attack as a REASON for why something is wrong.

        The extreme example being: “Hitler says being a vegetarian is good. But Hitler was a fucking Nazi.”

        It’s implying the character flaws of the individual are associated with the subject of debate. It’s often used in tandem with the Strawman Fallacy to both create doubt in the character of your opponent as well as mischaracterize what your opponent is arguing so it is easily defeated.

        She constantly strawmans here by invoking any criticism towards Israel as being instead on “Jews”. Which, maybe worked two years ago. But Zionist are sniffing their own farts at this point. The only people that believe that anymore are other Zionist.

        • AlphaOmega@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          15 hours ago

          Definition is: (of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining.

          I am not an English professor.

          The argument was: “When Cenk floated the idea that Israel got a “pass” on committing genocide against Palestinians, Miller wondered if the Trump administration might need to take a closer look at his recently granted citizenship.”

          The argument being that the administration was turning a blind eye or even complicit in the genocide. The response was a threat but also a personal attack as in their opinion or argument was invalid because of their ethnicity, citizenship, etc. To me, that is a reaction that was directed against the person instead of the position they were maintaining.

          “Ad hominem is NOT when someone insults someone they are arguing with. It’s when they use the insult or personal attack as a REASON for why something is wrong.”

          I still think the reaction of threatening someone based on ethnicity/citizenship was their REASON why this person’s argument is invalid. But I am assuming that is what they were implying with the threat.

          I assume that the threat of deportation was the answer to the argument, as it implies that argument is invalid due to the actual person presenting the argument and not an actual answer or debate. But I do see how it’s more a subtle interpretation. They don’t actually say it, they just imply that the argument is wrong based on a personal attack.

          I think what you’re saying is it should have been more like Miller responded with a direct personal attack as the reason for why the argument was wrong. But for me it seems like that was implied as the reason.
          Maybe it’s a stretch ¯_(ツ)_/¯