These stories usually have some non-trivial factor that is missing in the article. In this case there's a small visible red flag: the two tourists are British but traveling on B visas, rather than using the visa waiver program. Why? Well according the DHS they both have multi-year overstays in the US.
This doesn't justify the detention they went through. But it also means the lesson of the story is not "random tourists are being detained".
The article clearly says only Bill had overstayed, not Karen. "Bill’s US visa had expired; Karen’s had not.".
The B2 visa seems to be because the length of the trip exceeded the ESTA limit, "over two months", perhaps the original plan had been for a longer trip.
The Guardian article linked has chosen to omit material facts regarding Karen... This is par for the course when it comes to Guardian reporting and doubly so for immigration related articles. The Guardian only prints hit pieces nowadays that reinforce their group-think propaganda.
>What the media won’t tell you: this woman was BANNED from our country for 10 years for violating terms of her visa.
Here are the facts:
Karen Newton has violated the laws of our nation, and overstayed her visa waiver admission for almost FOUR years after visiting her spouse. Her husband, William Newton ALSO broke the law for nearly 20 years by overstaying an H-1B visa.
The Biden Administration granted her a tourist visa, and she traveled to the U.S. under this visa and was let into our nation.
When she and her husband attempted to cross the Canadian border, they did not have proper paperwork for their vehicle and were denied entry into Canada. During her inspection re-entering the U.S., she was unable to provide clear details about her situation, including her husband’s legal status.
Given her history of overstays, her husband’s unlawful presence, and the vehicle documentation issues, officers determined scrutiny and detention were warranted under the law and she was detained.
Yes, because a DHS statement, published on Twitter of all places, isn't going to be propaganda. I can't think of any instances of them blatantly lying even against their own video evidence in, like, at least a week. /s
When a publication only publishes the "oppresseds" point of view without ever publishing the other view then it is by definition propaganda. The Guardian has been incredibly consistent in this over years now.
These stories usually have some non-trivial factor that is missing in the article. In this case there's a small visible red flag: the two tourists are British but traveling on B visas, rather than using the visa waiver program. Why? Well according the DHS they both have multi-year overstays in the US.
This doesn't justify the detention they went through. But it also means the lesson of the story is not "random tourists are being detained".
The article clearly says only Bill had overstayed, not Karen. "Bill’s US visa had expired; Karen’s had not.".
The B2 visa seems to be because the length of the trip exceeded the ESTA limit, "over two months", perhaps the original plan had been for a longer trip.
The Guardian article linked has chosen to omit material facts regarding Karen... This is par for the course when it comes to Guardian reporting and doubly so for immigration related articles. The Guardian only prints hit pieces nowadays that reinforce their group-think propaganda.
https://x.com/DHSgov/status/2025975226002018309
>What the media won’t tell you: this woman was BANNED from our country for 10 years for violating terms of her visa.
Here are the facts:
Karen Newton has violated the laws of our nation, and overstayed her visa waiver admission for almost FOUR years after visiting her spouse. Her husband, William Newton ALSO broke the law for nearly 20 years by overstaying an H-1B visa.
The Biden Administration granted her a tourist visa, and she traveled to the U.S. under this visa and was let into our nation.
When she and her husband attempted to cross the Canadian border, they did not have proper paperwork for their vehicle and were denied entry into Canada. During her inspection re-entering the U.S., she was unable to provide clear details about her situation, including her husband’s legal status.
Given her history of overstays, her husband’s unlawful presence, and the vehicle documentation issues, officers determined scrutiny and detention were warranted under the law and she was detained.
No, Karen overstayed previously by 4 years when visiting Bill, that's why she had B-2.
The Guardian is complete propaganda - without exaggeration every single article about this issue has been utter lies.
See this for more balance https://x.com/DHSgov/status/2025975226002018309
Yes, because a DHS statement, published on Twitter of all places, isn't going to be propaganda. I can't think of any instances of them blatantly lying even against their own video evidence in, like, at least a week. /s
When a publication only publishes the "oppresseds" point of view without ever publishing the other view then it is by definition propaganda. The Guardian has been incredibly consistent in this over years now.
That's whataboutism. Doesn't change the fact that The Guardian _is_ propaganda.