Caricature Editorial cartooning Illustration

Stephen Miller’s Wife Calls Illustration “Left-Wing Terror”

Calling it “abhorrent” Katie Miller is not happy about the illustration of her husband that accompanied The New Republic feature article delineating the lineage of Deputy Chief of Staff to the White House Stephen Miller as his ancestors immigrated from the Russian Empire (now Belarus) to the United States and comparing that background to Miller heading the effort to prosecute “those he deems alien and unassimilable.”

Matt Mahurin, The New Republic

Mrs. Miller found nothing to complain about the reporting of Greg Sargent rather it was the Matt Mahurin illustration she found troubling. Said Katie Miller on X:

This is an abhorrent image meant to incite violence. This is your far-left who I was confidently told was trying to bring down the hateful rhetoric. What a joke these people are. This is how Left-Wing Terror is perpetuated.

Katie Miller on X

Alexander Willis for the left-wing Raw Story carries the story:

The caricature was drawn by illustrator and filmmaker Matt Muhurin [sic]. It was used in an analysis published Monday in The New Republic, highlighting the irony of Stephen Miller’s fierce “anti-immigrant project” given his Jewish ancestors who fled Tsarist Russia to avoid state-sanctioned antisemitic discrimination.

The illustration depicts Stephen Miller with an enlarged head, blank stare, and with several tentacles being used to separate migrants from their families, a clear reference to his deep involvement in the Trump administration’s aggressive deportation policy that has sent migrants to notoriously dangerous and deadly prisons abroad and targeted those with no criminal history outside of their immigration status.

Previous Post
Beetle Bailey’s Stepson Reflects
Next Post
A Savage Art Now Streaming Everywhere
A savage Art

Comments 5

  1. Boss Tweed: “Let’s stop them damn pictures. I don’t care so much what the papers write about—my constituents can’t read—but damn it, they can see pictures!”

  2. Yes because there’s nothing that has a broader reach among the folk most likely to form an angry mob as…The New Republic? She does know people don’t read magazines anymore, right?

    As to the fairness of the caricature, she’s seen her husband in person, right?

  3. I’d sue her for libel. No person with common sense believes this was meant to–or actually could–“incite violence”.

  4. And they call everybody ELSE “snowflakes.”

  5. Their accusations are confessions.

Comments are closed.

Search

Subscribe to our newsletter

Get a daily recap of the news posted each day.