By John Q. Hosedrinker 
In a recent statement regarding the Minneapolis standoff, Vance’s remarks failed to alleviate concerns, potentially worsening the administration’s stance on key issues. The central focus was the case of Liam Kanejo Ramos, a 5-year-old detained by ICE, whose story gained significant attention. While Vance expressed empathy by mentioning his own child, his subsequent “follow-up research” revealed the father’s status as an “illegal alien,” effectively undermining any initial display of compassion. This revelation highlighted a potential justification for the child’s continued detention.
Read the original article here
Trump’s ICE Goons Detained a 5-Year-Old. Then JD Vance Made It Worse. Let’s just say it: detaining a five-year-old child is horrifying. It’s the kind of action that should elicit universal condemnation. Yet, when something like this happens, it’s rarely a standalone event. There’s often a ripple effect, and in this case, that ripple was, unfortunately, the voice of J.D. Vance, a figure who seems to have a knack for making bad situations even more atrocious. It’s almost as if he possesses a reverse Midas touch, turning everything he touches into a festering wound.
Vance’s response, whatever it might have been, likely amplified the negativity surrounding the situation. We can almost picture the scenario: the child, already traumatized by the detention, and then Vance adding fuel to the fire with some statement or defense that, intentionally or not, trivialized the child’s experience. It’s a pattern we see time and time again.
It’s disheartening to consider that there are people out there who would cheer on such actions. The notion that a social media presence might be flooded with those “cheering” for a child’s detention is deeply troubling. It speaks to a level of dehumanization and a callousness that’s difficult to comprehend. The idea of a “Facebook bot army” deployed to defend such a thing is particularly disturbing, a reminder of how easily narratives can be manipulated and how the truth can be obscured in the digital age.
The focus on the “illegal” status of the child’s father, and, by extension, the child, is a typical tactic. It’s a way to deflect from the core issue – the unjust treatment of a vulnerable individual. The insinuation that the child was “abandoned” is a cheap play, a way to paint the situation in a more palatable light for those who might otherwise be appalled. What else could they have done with the child, let them freeze?
What would ICE do with the boy? It’s not a difficult question; most reasonable people would agree that the child should have been reunited with their family or placed in a safe environment. Instead, this story reminds us that what is happening is truly the “worst of the worst.”
JD Vance, unfortunately, tends to follow the same playbook. He appears to be someone who has a talent for making things worse. It is the perfect irony that he would be considered for a leadership role.
It’s also worth noting the political context. Detaining a child in this manner isn’t just a humanitarian issue; it’s a political one, and Vance’s involvement only serves to politicize the trauma. His actions contribute to the ongoing divisiveness and the erosion of empathy that seem to define so much of the current political landscape.
The mention of the Epstein files is another important element. It highlights how these kinds of acts against children can be used as distractions to sweep other matters under the rug. It suggests that there are people in power trying to protect themselves and their friends at all costs, even at the expense of children.
The overall sentiment is clear: detaining a five-year-old is wrong, and Vance’s response is likely to have made it worse. The situation is a stain on humanity, an example of the moral rot that can occur when power is wielded without compassion.