Wouldn't a real ISIS baby have an AK?

We bet Sean Spicer can't hardly wait for President Trump to announce "his" choice for the Supreme Court tonight, so the media will ask a bunch of mean liberal questions about the SCOTUS pick instead of all these mean liberal questions about a bunch of dumb foreigns whose banning was supposed to make everyone happy, but hasn't, because liberal crybabies keep going on about "fairness" and acting as if people from the Middle East have rights, even. So during his press briefing Monday -- or whatever we're calling his daily yell-at-the-media sessions -- Spicer explained that instead of covering the detentions of people who had the bad taste to get caught in the air when Donald Trump signed the executive order invalidating their entry into the USA as if that were a bad thing, journalists should instead be glad that President Trump had the wisdom to keep us safe from potential terrorists who we ended up letting into the country. (Oh, right, because also they're citizens.)

NBC's Kristen Welker asked Spicer if it had really improved America's security that much to keep a 5-year-old Iranian boy from being reunited with his mother for hours -- pardon us, a 5-year-old AMERICAN CITIZEN, who was reportedly handcuffed -- asking why exactly that was such a great idea. WJLA reports the boy was traveling with a relative and his mother was waiting for him at Dulles International airport.

Sen. Chris Van Hollen said on Facebook the boy was a U.S. citizen who lives with his family in Maryland, as if U.S. citizens had the right to go visit relatives in terrorist countries like Iran that don't have any Trump hotels. Van Hollen noted immigration authorities had even been given advance notice of the boy's arrival, but held him for over four hours and refused to give the senator an answer when he called later to see whether the boy had been released.

Sean Spicer -- who appears not to have known the boy was a U.S. citizen; why would he need to know that? -- was pretty ticked that Welker would even ask, because what exactly doesn't Welker understand about keeping America safe from terrorism?

The president recognizes that it is his duty and obligation to keep this country safe. And by instituting a process by which we look at these countries over a 90-day period and the process by which the people can come in out of this country to ensure the safety of each and every one of us, I think, is something that makes a heck of a lot of sense.

Spicer blames "misguided media reports" for people thinking there might be anything wrong with how the travel ban was implemented over the weekend, and insisted that people need to understand it was really no big deal to detain a bunch of people with valid visas (and now, it turns out, at least one small American citizen), who were only a tiny part of the traveling public: "When you look at the 329,000 people, 109 were inconvenienced for the safety of us all."

Then Welker asked how the detention of a five-year-old boy was necessary to keeping America safe. Welker also seemed to be unaware the boy was a citizen, but at least noticed he was five years old. Spicer explained everything turned out OK, but only because we have the good sense to treat everyone as a threat:

And they were processed through, Kristen. That’s the process. The point is you can go through and nitpick and say this individual -- that’s why we slow it down. And to make sure if they are a five-year-old, then maybe that they are with their parents and they don’t pose a threat. But to assume that just because of someone’s age or gender or whatever that they don’t pose a threat is misguided and wrong.

See? That five-year-old could have been one of those notorious terrorist five-year-olds, of the sort that have not attacked America, ever. It's very important to interrogate small children, since, as we already know, a couple years ago the Border Patrol filed paperwork saying a three-year-old admitted he'd crossed the southern border to "look for work," so it was OK to deport him rather than treat him as an asylum-seeker. So to be completely fair and keep America safe, we need to treat kindergarten-aged kids as the ticking time bombs they may turn out to be.* We really like that borrowing of social justice phrasing -- "just because of someone's age or gender" -- as if this were a job interview.

Instead of acting like there's something outrageous about detaining little kids, we should be thanking President Trump for his wisdom in ordering the detention of all foreigns. Even the ones who are actually CITIZENS, but may have not mentioned their citizenship status, being five years old and all. We're not sure how you do extreme vetting of a five-year-old; maybe you just have to waterboard them until they promise not to grow up to hate America.

And don't even get Trump and Spicer started on Chuck Schumer pretending to care about a bunch of foreigns being separated from their families, because -- science fact -- it is unpossible for a real American to cry about foreigner children. Or should be. Maybe instead of wasting money researching "global warming," which is fake, we should spend it on finding out what's wrong with liberals' brains that they think foreigns love their families like normal people?

*Also, a quick note to potential Deleted Commenters: Yes, some terrorist groups have used children as suicide bombers in the Middle East and Africa. The youngest we've seen reports of were twelve, and it's definitely barbaric, especially since the children used by these groups are often mentally challenged. But those cases don't involve international airline flights of American citizens, so please shut up.

[Mediaite / RawStory / Inquisitr / Chris Van Hollen on Facebook / WJLA / HuffPo / CNN]