Kristi Noem faced Margaret Brennan on national television and pushed back hard over claims about how many detained migrants have criminal charges, calling out the media’s tendency to downplay illegal entry and to cherry-pick statistics. The interview turned into a clear confrontation about law enforcement priorities, who gets detained, and whether mainstream outlets present accurate numbers. This piece walks through that exchange, explains the stakes for border enforcement, and highlights why administration officials keep taking those risky TV spots.
On CBS News’ Face the Nation, Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem made a simple, direct point: every illegal border crossing is a crime, and a large share of those detained are linked to violent offenses or other criminal charges. Noem held firm when host Margaret Brennan disputed the percentage Noem cited, standing by the claim that roughly 70 percent of those detained have charges or convictions. The back-and-forth was terse and unapologetic, and it exposed how conservative officials view the media’s framing of immigration enforcement.
That confrontation matters because it goes to the heart of enforcement strategy. The administration says it prioritizes detaining and deporting known dangerous individuals rather than low-risk migrants, and Noem insisted that the numbers support that approach. When a major network host labels illegal entry a “civil infraction” in effect, that diminishes the seriousness of repeated or violent offenses and undermines public understanding of who is being held in custody.
Noem also accused the media of changing percentages and picking numbers that suit a narrative, saying that law enforcement officers are doing their jobs to protect Americans. From a Republican perspective, that defense is straightforward: enforcing immigration laws protects communities and national security, and officials will not shy away from stating that plainly. The interview showcased the tension between administration messaging and the way legacy outlets often seek contradictions or “gotcha” moments.
Television interviews like this are high-stakes and highly visible. Critics argue that going on shows where hosts aim to trap guests is unnecessary, but the administration sees value in speaking directly to large audiences and correcting what they call disinformation. Noem’s willingness to go on air and speak bluntly reflects a strategy: contest the narrative where millions still get political news, instead of retreating to alternative platforms that reach only niche audiences.
That choice carries risks. On camera, a short, heated exchange can be replayed endlessly and used to question credibility. But the alternative is surrendering the narrative to outlets that will shape the story without pushback. For Republicans, the answer has been to keep showing up and to refuse to accept frames that minimize criminal conduct tied to illegal crossings.
The substance of the debate is more than stats and soundbites. It is about law, public safety, and the enforcement priorities set by an administration that believes deterrence matters. Noem’s argument is that detaining individuals with criminal histories and prosecuting cases sends a clear signal that illegal entry and related offenses have real consequences. To critics, however, accusers and defenders trade certainty and doubt over figures and definitions.
Margaret Brennan: What’s the breakdown of the percentage of those who you have in custody, that have actually committed a criminal offense versus just the civil infraction?
Kristi Noem: Every single individual has committed a crime. Though 70 percent of them have committed, or have charges against them on violent crimes. Crimes that they are charged with, or have been convicted of, that have come from other countries, that are here illegally, first of all. And then, they have committed a criminal act while they’ve been here, or in their home countries, as well.
MB: It’s not 70 percent.
KN: Yes, it is. It absolutely is 70 percent.
MB: 70 percent of everyone that…
KN (interrupting): You guys keep changing your percentage, you pick and choose what numbers you think work, but that is the fact. That 70 percent of the people that we have detained have charges against them or have been convicted of charges. And they need to be brought to justice, so we’re going to keep doing that no matter how much you guys keep lying and don’t tell the public the truth. It absolutely is, that these law enforcement officers are out there every day, doing the work to protect the American people, and they will keep doing that because they believe in enforcing the law, which is exactly what President Trump has charged them with.
The exchange made headlines because it highlighted a broader fight over how to describe illegal crossings and who should face consequences. For supporters of tougher enforcement, calling illegal entry a crime is not rhetoric, it is a legal reality. That framing shapes policy debates and public opinion alike.
Taking on legacy media is part of a larger communications tactic: show up, speak plainly, and call out what you see as biased framing. Whether you agree with that approach or not, it is a deliberate choice that reflects priorities about law enforcement, deterrence, and the need to assert a clear message in front of mass audiences. Officials will likely keep stepping into that arena because the alternative is silence while narratives form without pushback.
Add comment