Univision anchor Jorge Ramos made yet another appearance on Fox News' Hannity, and reeled off an interview that was an exercise in contradictions and inconsistencies.
Here's how Ramos sought to frame the interview after Hannity's opening statement:
JORGE RAMOS, SENIOR NEWS ANCHOR, UNIVISION: No one here, Sean, and this is very important. No one here, including me, is defending criminals in this country. No one here is defending terrorists or rapists, no one is doing that.
After bickering with Hannity over the percentage of unauthorized immigrants in the country that commit crimes, and after playing an Angel Mom interview segment, Ramos then committed an amazing piece of verbal sleight-of-hand, by proceeding to parse down the definition of "criminal."
SEAN HANNITY: Should every criminal illegal immigrant be thrown out of this country? Every one.
JORGE RAMOS: If they committed a crime.
HANNITY: Any crime.
RAMOS: A real crime? Absolutely. Absolutely. Well, the problem is. How do you define a crime. For instance...
HANNITY: Ok, how about driving drunk, driving drunk on our streets? Using drugs?
RAMOS: If you use a Social Security number, a fake driver's license, would that be considered a crime?
<<< Please support MRC's NewsBusters team with a tax-deductible contribution today. >>>
That bit of wordplay regarding criminal activity is more consistent with what Ramos said back in December, on his own show. Here's how he responded to the suggestion that President Trump would only be interested in deporting an estimated 3 million criminal aliens as opposed to all 11 million illegally in the country:
But Donald Trump had talked about deporting three million. It would be like two-thousand per day. That is a horror for our families.
Much of the interview was largely a debate where both host and guest alike shouted talking points and supporting data past each other. Everyone preaches to their own choir, and supporters of one will cheer the "destruction" of the other.
However, some truth still manages to emerge from what passes for "debate". Towards the end of the exchange (which centered on extreme vetting) Ramos let slip this nugget after echoing some of the points in his latest lecture-column, and after proclaiming his love for the portions of the Constitution that he likes:
"Background check is much better than Kate's Law."
A fair, substantive debate on immigration would force Ramos to clearly state which controls are acceptable to him, if any, and seek a response from him as to which specific criminal offenses warrant deportation beyond murder, rape and terrorism. Anyone debating Ramos would also hopefully point out the fact that his network's business model is still largely predicated on lax immigration policy.
Below is a transcript of the interview portion referenced above, as aired on Hannity on Monday, February 13, 2017.
SEAN HANNITY Here now to debate the issue, Univision news anchor Jorge Ramos. Are you at all concerned about Americans that have been killed by illegal immigrants? Are you concerned about the drugs I have come into this country? Are you concerned about the money Americans have to pay for illegal immigrants as it relates to our educational system, health care, criminal justice? You say you do not recognize the country, well, I think America is a country of law. Do any of these things impress you at all or do you have any concern for your fellow American citizens?
JORGE RAMOS: Absolutely, absolutely. No one here, including me, is defending criminals in this country. No one is defending terrorists or rapists. But the way you're presenting this issue is completely biased, absolutely wrong.
