Tensions flared in the Oval Office as former President Donald Trump and top administration officials confronted CNN reporter Kaitlan Collins over the controversial deportation of a Maryland man to El Salvador. The incident, which has triggered legal and diplomatic disputes, centers around Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a legal U.S. resident wrongly removed from the country despite a Supreme Court order.
On April 14, during a press availability, Collins pressed Trump on the administration’s handling of Garcia’s deportation, probing if the United States would ask El Salvador to assist in the return of Garcia.
“Why don’t you just say, ‘Isn’t it wonderful that we’re keeping criminals out of our country?’ Why can’t you just say that? Why do you go over and over — and that’s why nobody watches you anymore. You have no credibility.” Trump asserted.
Trump repeatedly interrupted Collins, demanding she acknowledge that Garcia had been previously flagged by law enforcement.
El Salvador President, Nayib Bukele joined Trump during the press availability. Trump continued slandering the infamous news network asking Bukele if he wanted to answer questions from the “very low-rated anchor.”
The questions from CNN, according to Trump, were asked “with a slant, because they are totally slanted.”
“They don’t know what’s happening, that’s why nobody is watching them,” Trump went on to add.
Attorney General Pam Bondi and Homeland Security Adviser Stephen Miller stood by the administration’s actions. Bondi alleged that Garcia had past gang affiliations, specifically naming MS-13, despite his prior acquittals. Miller added that the removal was part of broader national security measures, hinting at renewed efforts to clamp down on illegal immigration and related criminal activity.
Miller joined Trump in his commentary against the left-leaning outlet, stating it is “very arrogant even for American media to suggest that we would even tell El Salvador how to handle their own citizens.”
CNN’s exchange with Trump officials highlights the network’s continued pattern of framing immigration enforcement in a confrontational light, often prioritizing emotional narratives over legal realities. Rather than probing the implications of a Supreme Court order or the legal grounds for deportation, the network focused its coverage on personal outrage and dramatic confrontation.
