MS NOW host Rachel Maddow took a discussion about immigration detention centers and expanded it into a warning that President Donald Trump could eventually use such facilities to imprison “the rest of us.” The dramatic suggestion came Monday during an appearance on “The Daily Show.”

As The New York Post reported, Maddow and host Jon Stewart were discussing the Department of Homeland Security’s decision to cancel plans for an immigration center in Social Circle, Georgia. The proposed facility, located in a commercial warehouse, would have had capacity for 10,000 detainees.

The proposal was canceled after facing local opposition. Maddow portrayed that outcome as a community successfully resisting plans for massive facilities capable of holding thousands of people.

Trump's Sovereign Wealth Fund: What Could It Mean For Your Money?

“Social circle stood up for itself,” Maddow said. “You know, people all over the country where Trump wanted to put these mega prisons, these were huge warehouses to hold people by the thousands. Places that would hold five, six, seven, ten, 14,000 people, all without trial, held indefinitely.”

Stewart argued that people detained for immigration violations were being held “for things that are generally considered in our society, civil issues. These are not the worst of the worst.”

He also offered examples of the cases he had in mind. “These are people who overstayed a student visa or are here on a green card but got a parking ticket, like ticky-tack s— that normally would be treated civilly,” he said.

Maddow acknowledged that other scenarios were possible, but she quickly pushed the conversation beyond immigrant advocates and immigration enforcement. Her argument centered on the possibility that Trump could eventually direct the facilities toward a much broader group.

FREE Gun Law Map: Laws Don't Pause During Social Unrest

“No, I’m sorry, with a president like this, if you give him seven to ten prisons around the country that hold 10,000 people each, where he can hold people without trial, without access to lawyers, indefinitely, you think he’s only going to leave immigrants in there?” she asked.

Maddow then delivered her sweeping conclusion. “I just don’t,” she said. “I think that what they first do to immigrants, they want to do to the rest of us.”

The White House responded with a blistering attack on Stewart.

Spokesman Davis Ingle told Fox News Digital, “Jon Stewart is a talentless hack who clearly suffers from a severe and debilitating disease known as Trump Derangement Syndrome that has rotted his peanut-sized brain and ruined his life to the point he has to compensate for his embarrassing inadequacies.”

Elizabeth Pipko, a former Republican National Committee national spokesperson, also rejected the framing used during the exchange. She accused figures on the left of blurring the distinction between immigrants and illegal immigrants.

Pipko said it was “amazing how so many on the left have simply decided they can conflate immigrants with illegal immigrants and hope nobody notices.” She followed with a blunt reminder: “There is a difference.”

“Immigrants came to this country legally, built lives here and became proud American citizens,” Pipko said. “They are not targets for deportation or arrest by immigration officers. Rachel Maddow and Jon Stewart both know that.”

Pipko argued that Maddow was using the issue to promote a political narrative against Trump. “This is an attempt to go viral and to push a political narrative against a president she doesn’t like, regardless of who suffers along the way. It’s selfish and evil, and, worst of all, she knows it but does it anyway,” she added.

The exchange began with a canceled Georgia detention proposal and ended with Maddow imagining facilities filled with people far beyond the immigration system. The White House and Pipko answered that speculation with sharp criticism of Stewart, Maddow, and the left’s broader framing of immigration enforcement.

The opinions expressed by contributors and/or content partners are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of Objectivist. Contact us for guidelines on submitting your own commentary.