• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EST 13:04
CET 19:04
KST 03:04
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
RSL Season 3 - RO16 Groups C & D Preview0RSL Season 3 - RO16 Groups A & B Preview2TL.net Map Contest #21: Winners12Intel X Team Liquid Seoul event: Showmatches and Meet the Pros10[ASL20] Finals Preview: Arrival13
Community News
[TLMC] Fall/Winter 2025 Ladder Map Rotation12Weekly Cups (Nov 3-9): Clem Conquers in Canada4SC: Evo Complete - Ranked Ladder OPEN ALPHA8StarCraft, SC2, HotS, WC3, Returning to Blizzcon!45$5,000+ WardiTV 2025 Championship7
StarCraft 2
General
Mech is the composition that needs teleportation t RotterdaM "Serral is the GOAT, and it's not close" RSL Season 3 - RO16 Groups C & D Preview [TLMC] Fall/Winter 2025 Ladder Map Rotation TL.net Map Contest #21: Winners
Tourneys
RSL Revival: Season 3 Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament Constellation Cup - Main Event - Stellar Fest Tenacious Turtle Tussle Master Swan Open (Global Bronze-Master 2)
Strategy
Custom Maps
Map Editor closed ?
External Content
Mutation # 499 Chilling Adaptation Mutation # 498 Wheel of Misfortune|Cradle of Death Mutation # 497 Battle Haredened Mutation # 496 Endless Infection
Brood War
General
FlaSh on: Biggest Problem With SnOw's Playstyle What happened to TvZ on Retro? SnOw's ASL S20 Finals Review BW General Discussion Brood War web app to calculate unit interactions
Tourneys
[Megathread] Daily Proleagues Small VOD Thread 2.0 [BSL21] RO32 Group D - Sunday 21:00 CET [BSL21] RO32 Group C - Saturday 21:00 CET
Strategy
PvZ map balance Current Meta Simple Questions, Simple Answers How to stay on top of macro?
Other Games
General Games
Path of Exile Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Nintendo Switch Thread Clair Obscur - Expedition 33 Beyond All Reason
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Deck construction bug Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread SPIRED by.ASL Mafia {211640}
Community
General
Russo-Ukrainian War Thread Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine US Politics Mega-thread Artificial Intelligence Thread Canadian Politics Mega-thread
Fan Clubs
White-Ra Fan Club The herO Fan Club!
Media & Entertainment
Movie Discussion! [Manga] One Piece Anime Discussion Thread Korean Music Discussion Series you have seen recently...
Sports
2024 - 2026 Football Thread Formula 1 Discussion NBA General Discussion MLB/Baseball 2023 TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
SC2 Client Relocalization [Change SC2 Language] Linksys AE2500 USB WIFI keeps disconnecting Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
Dyadica Gospel – a Pulp No…
Hildegard
Coffee x Performance in Espo…
TrAiDoS
Saturation point
Uldridge
DnB/metal remix FFO Mick Go…
ImbaTosS
Reality "theory" prov…
perfectspheres
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 2032 users

US Politics Mega-thread - Page 5021

Forum Index > General Forum
Post a Reply
Prev 1 5019 5020 5021 5022 5023 5356 Next
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting!

NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.

Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.


If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread
BlackJack
Profile Blog Joined June 2003
United States10574 Posts
June 12 2025 04:24 GMT
#100401
On June 12 2025 13:01 KwarK wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 12 2025 10:27 BlackJack wrote:
The news story says she confronted the officers and she was blocking the doors. If you get in between officers and someone they are trying to arrest you are obstructing them. It's fairly straightforward.

If the door is the entrance to a building and they have no warrant then she's not obstructing them because they have no right to enter the building in the first place.


The doors she is referring to are the car doors of the vehicle they were in so no concerns there
oBlade
Profile Blog Joined December 2008
United States5765 Posts
June 12 2025 05:10 GMT
#100402
On June 12 2025 01:24 Jankisa wrote:
You spend inordinate amount of time defending Trump and his policies, including the ones that are "gray area" and that were never used in the way that he's using them because you want to see brown people suffer, because you are, just like him a racist and a bad person.

I'm calling you a racist because you are a Tucker Carlson super-fan who spreads white replacement theory bullshit thinly veiled as "protecting sovereignty".

Absolute slander. Just made-up.

On June 12 2025 01:24 Jankisa wrote:
Also, just as a side note on your most hilarious and obvious omissions or non answers, SF school board voting = attack on sovereignty and lack of answering if you believe Trump's 2020 lies.

No, you asked me whether immigrants voted, thinking you knew the answer. You don't have any requisite background knowledge or awareness of the subject so it makes things hard. I gave you a genuine answer. I didn't say SF school board voting is destroying America.

Your level of discussion, or comprehension, is thus:
oBlade (Monday): Ice cream is delicious.
oBlade (Tuesday): Laws should exist.
Jankisa: oBlade is a white supremacist who thinks brown people are coming to steal all the ice cream because Tucker Carlson said so.

Whatever planet you're on, share how you got there faster than Musk did.

On June 12 2025 01:24 Jankisa wrote:
You guys should start a circus!

Cool, how much would you pay for something like that?
On June 12 2025 01:27 Falling wrote:
Posse Comitatus.

This is getting framed by the usual suspects as a matter of LAW and ORDER vs Democrat anarchy. But that is not the question.

Protesting is legal. Rioting is not and generally should be stopped and punished. The question is,
1) Do the protests and the violence that has broken out rise to the level of emergency that requires the use of federalizing the National Guard? Something that has not been done for sixty years.

Knowing what happened last term when Democrats didn't get their way, yes.

On June 12 2025 01:27 Falling wrote:
2) And is this an emergency that is so great that requires contravening the Posse Comitatus Act which bars federal troops from participating in civilian law enforcement?
(Is this not the nightmare scenario the 2a militia groups and preppers have been dreaming about since Waco, Texas?)

The Posse Comitatus Act forbids you use the army for normal law enforcement. There are other statutory authorities that do exist which are what have been invoked. If something has exceptions, you aren't contravening it when you use an exception.

On June 12 2025 01:27 Falling wrote:
What evidence do you have? Up here, we had hockey riots that burned not a few cars, including police cars. Didn't need the military to break up.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/riots-erupt-in-vancouver-after-canucks-loss-1.993707
LA police are also capable of dealing with riots. They do happen in LA from time to time, I understand.

You normalize the rioting culture of the largest city in America because hockey fans also don't have self control. Addendum smiley face. If LA was capable they wouldn't have riots.

On June 12 2025 01:27 Falling wrote:
And let's add a few pieces to whether this rises to that level of emergency:
1) Trump (the sharpest of bulbs) has been calling everything and anything an emergency this administration so he can rule by fiat without Congress. Is everything an emergency all the time in America these days (fentanyl over the border of Canada, let's recall.) Wolf! Wolf! cried the boy.

2) He wants to use the military all the time on his political foes (last administration there were still conservatives that could check his authoritarian impulses). But insurrectionists on his behalf? Full pardons, deny the violence and weapons carried: just a big beautiful party. His every impulse is authoritarian use of the military as evidenced by holding a military parade for his birthday party.

3) He's the moron who gets his news from clip chimped social media posts- if you still believe the stolen election lies, then at least he demonstrated his idiocy (or else bold and unapologetic dishonesty) in plain view by showing clips from the Congo to accuse South Africa of white genocide. And thought the letters and numbers M S 13 were literally tattooed onto Kilmar's knuckles and wouldn't let up when the reporter desperately and cowardly tried to move on.

4) He's already lying saying the riots are causing a lot of death. Where? Which ones? Or is that a warning for when he sends in the troops?

This is a lot of expanding the scope and rehashing every issue you ever had with Trump.

He speaks 24/7, if you don't cite this particular quote of causing death can't say that I've heard it. Certainly "riots" cause death whether or not this one has yet. If he said someone died but nobody died, then he would be incorrect. I did a cursory search just now they found a body downtown, and I saw separately a LEO had been shot. But if you interpret that to mean he is going to use military forces to massacre people, your interpretation is wanting.

You say flippantly, but Canadian border situation had been getting worse also. I haven't looked into it since the new administration. The fact that it's originally a smaller issue than the southern border doesn't mean that if the Canadian border got 2x worse than itself in the past, that it wouldn't be an issue because it's still not as bad as a bigger issue.
On June 12 2025 01:27 Falling wrote:
You are going to believe this Washington elite over local LA police who say they do not need the National Guard nor the military and in fact it's simply making matters worse according to them?

LAPD chief is appointed by the mayor, who is a literal revolutionary who trained in Cuba.

Yeah federal law enforcement and national guard make things worse, because by existing, they allow violent extremists to throw concrete at them. If they didn't exist, rioters throwing concrete at them and looting Apple stores might decrease.

On June 12 2025 01:27 Falling wrote:
No, this is not federalism in action. The entire point of federalism (or at least used to be) is that power is not centralized but especially in the US and Canada states/ provinces have a lot of reserved power to run their own affairs because the country is too vast for a central authority to accurately know how to govern from afar. Local matters resolved locally. Why is the federal government over-riding state authority when all you have is the clips of the same cars on fire cycled again and again?

It's not a local matter. It stopped being local the second a federal agent was involved. Best case scenario, it's an issue of cooperation between state and federal government. Since California/LA are off the deep end, they're overridden. California doesn't get to reject federal law.

Let me give you an example. California is so uncooperative that they don't let federal agents get criminal aliens out of the California state criminal justice system.

What do I mean by this?

In a normal state, ICE issues 2-day detainers when local/state authorities pick up someone that ICE wants or has on their radar. If the agency can afford it, and wants to be helpful, they hold the person. If they want to help, but can't afford it, I believe there should be more programs for the federal government to encourage and reimburse cooperation. But that's a tangent now.

Because the federal government can't commandeer the state to enforce federal law, this is optional. Meaning you can be a jurisdiction who makes a policy that okay, if we have a "bad hombre" and ICE puts a detainer request on him, we'll cooperate. But if we just have for example someone who got cleared of everything, didn't do anything violent just a bunch of unpaid parking tickets or something, we won't hold him for no other reason than an ICE detainer about immigration status. Okay, whatever.

California does not let federal agents into jails at all. The federal government does not want to have to do raids. They would rather safely transfer people from city and state custody to federal custody, when they are fucking convicted criminals with records who keep recidivating. They do not prefer to go into communities, which is unsafer for everyone, but nevertheless necessary and stipulated by execution of federal law.

But they have no choice. To get people like this. This is the obstinance of sanctuary policies.

On June 12 2025 01:27 Falling wrote:
Kristi Noem under Biden said federalizing the National Guard against her authority would be a 'direct attack on state's rights' and were Biden to do so, 'oh, boy, we do have a war on our hands.'

Firstly, I'm not Kristi Noem either.

But yes, Biden was very close to creating a constitutional crisis in the border states and especially Texas also.

The reason is this: The federal government's job is to secure the border and enforce immigration law. It's delegated specifically to them as their job and not the states'.

Biden and Mayorkas left the border open.

Texas mobilized state agents and National Guard to help secure their state, where the border is, against invasion. Biden sent federal agents to tear down fencing and unsecure it.

Can you understand why the federal government using the National Guard to do their job is different than the federal government ordering the National Guard not to do the federal government's job when the states have to do the federal government's job themselves because the federal government treasonously abdicates their own oath to execute federal law?

Enforcing the law is different than forcing a state to live with the fact that you are ignoring the law and they can't do anything about it themselves.

Luckily, Biden didn't stoop to making that particular mistake.

On June 12 2025 01:27 Falling wrote:
I was firmly against the Emergency Act being used against the Trucker protest as I believed that was government over-reach. This is a hundred times worse. It's nice to confirm (or be reminded) that you, oBlade, are not a conservative as I don't see how any principled conservative could support this. But what are you?

Canada and the US are different. Whether the Emergency Act applies or not to truckers sitting around on the street doing nothing (except were they blaring horns? I don't remember) is a different question than whether the US federal government can secure its own agents against people who interfere with them, attack them, block them, and siege their buildings. That is not protest. You let me know when a leftist union camps out somewhere peacefully to express dissatisfaction like Canadian truckers and Blumpf sends the marines to waste them all.
"I read it. You know how to read, you ignorant fuck?" - Andy Dufresne
Magic Powers
Profile Joined April 2012
Austria4478 Posts
June 12 2025 05:59 GMT
#100403
On June 12 2025 07:59 Introvert wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 12 2025 01:24 Jankisa wrote:
1. Introvert:

Re: The immigration bill.

I asked you why would a party and their leader that is actually motivated by fixing this problem not work it through legislature, as the founders have intended and you completely ignored it, for the, well, I lost count at this point. Then you went for some more hand wringing about civility.

The ICE raids have broken numerous laws, which is another thing you are ignoring. There are 0 precedents of masked "law enforcement" officers disappearing people from the streets and "mistakenly" deporting people in any country, including USA of 7 months ago, which is another thing you keep ignoring. Again, this is fine to you because you hate brown people so fuck them and fuck their due process.

2. oBlade:

You spend inordinate amount of time defending Trump and his policies, including the ones that are "gray area" and that were never used in the way that he's using them because you want to see brown people suffer, because you are, just like him a racist and a bad person.

I'm calling you a racist because you are a Tucker Carlson super-fan who spreads white replacement theory bullshit thinly veiled as "protecting sovereignty".

Also, just as a side note on your most hilarious and obvious omissions or non answers, SF school board voting = attack on sovereignty and lack of answering if you believe Trump's 2020 lies.

Both:

You guys should start a circus!



I told you, the executive already had the tools he needed, given to him by the legislature, under already existing laws. The point of bringing the legislature into it again was for the exact purpose of making a mess, not fixing the problem.

Things having no precedent are not illegal on that basis. I assume ICE is wearing masks to avoid doxxing. "Disappearing" people is primarily just another way to say "arrest" or "detain" things they are allowed to do. I'm already on record against deporting people to where they shouldn't go (although the government is not REQUIRED to deport people to their home country). Again it seems to be you don't want any enforcement at all. In LA, ICE got a warrant and executed on it. There was nothing underhanded in the raid so far as I'm aware. You are being (purposefully?) unclear here, I'm still left trying to figure out exactly what it is you are for or what you are at least ok with. While under some administrations it happens more or less than others, things like workplace raids are not illegal or unexpected.


Plenty of cases have come to light proving that ICE has arrested and detained legal citizens. Will you accept that you're wrong?

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/tracking-us-citizens-children-detained-deported-ice-trump-updates.html
If you want to do the right thing, 80% of your job is done if you don't do the wrong thing.
Magic Powers
Profile Joined April 2012
Austria4478 Posts
June 12 2025 06:11 GMT
#100404
On June 12 2025 09:46 BlackJack wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 12 2025 03:41 LightSpectra wrote:
‘I can't fight back; I'm pregnant': U.S. citizen detained by ICE in Hawthorne

We built a wholeass surveillance state just so ICE could abduct people for looking too Latino.

Incidentally this is why everything is happening at breakneck speed. There's slim approval for mass deportations at the moment but the far-right is well aware that'll degrade as more incidents like this pile up.


ICE arrests two undocumented migrants for being in the country without authorization and a 3rd person who obstructed them during the arrests. Why is this newsworthy?


Law enforcement such as ICE can't lawfully enter private property without an official warrant signed by a judge unless the owner allows entry free from coercion.

"This amendment serves as a fundamental safeguard of an individual’s privacy and personal security. It ensures that law enforcement officers cannot intrude into a person’s private property without a valid reason and a warrant issued by a judge. The Fourth Amendment aims to strike a balance between protecting citizens’ rights and allowing law enforcement to fulfill their duties."

https://esquireexplain.com/can-police-enter-private-property-without-permission/
If you want to do the right thing, 80% of your job is done if you don't do the wrong thing.
BlackJack
Profile Blog Joined June 2003
United States10574 Posts
June 12 2025 06:15 GMT
#100405
On June 12 2025 15:11 Magic Powers wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 12 2025 09:46 BlackJack wrote:
On June 12 2025 03:41 LightSpectra wrote:
‘I can't fight back; I'm pregnant': U.S. citizen detained by ICE in Hawthorne

We built a wholeass surveillance state just so ICE could abduct people for looking too Latino.

Incidentally this is why everything is happening at breakneck speed. There's slim approval for mass deportations at the moment but the far-right is well aware that'll degrade as more incidents like this pile up.


ICE arrests two undocumented migrants for being in the country without authorization and a 3rd person who obstructed them during the arrests. Why is this newsworthy?


Law enforcement such as ICE can't lawfully enter private property without an official warrant signed by a judge unless the owner allows entry free from coercion.

"This amendment serves as a fundamental safeguard of an individual’s privacy and personal security. It ensures that law enforcement officers cannot intrude into a person’s private property without a valid reason and a warrant issued by a judge. The Fourth Amendment aims to strike a balance between protecting citizens’ rights and allowing law enforcement to fulfill their duties."

https://esquireexplain.com/can-police-enter-private-property-without-permission/


No worries, mate. The arrest happened in public.
Magic Powers
Profile Joined April 2012
Austria4478 Posts
Last Edited: 2025-06-12 06:17:42
June 12 2025 06:17 GMT
#100406
On June 12 2025 13:24 BlackJack wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 12 2025 13:01 KwarK wrote:
On June 12 2025 10:27 BlackJack wrote:
The news story says she confronted the officers and she was blocking the doors. If you get in between officers and someone they are trying to arrest you are obstructing them. It's fairly straightforward.

If the door is the entrance to a building and they have no warrant then she's not obstructing them because they have no right to enter the building in the first place.


The doors she is referring to are the car doors of the vehicle they were in so no concerns there


A car that is owned privately is considered private property in America and thus off-limits for law enforcement without a legal warrant.

No worries, mate. The arrest happened in public.


No worries, mate. You clearly don't know what constitutes "private property".
If you want to do the right thing, 80% of your job is done if you don't do the wrong thing.
BlackJack
Profile Blog Joined June 2003
United States10574 Posts
June 12 2025 06:21 GMT
#100407
On June 12 2025 14:59 Magic Powers wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 12 2025 07:59 Introvert wrote:
On June 12 2025 01:24 Jankisa wrote:
1. Introvert:

Re: The immigration bill.

I asked you why would a party and their leader that is actually motivated by fixing this problem not work it through legislature, as the founders have intended and you completely ignored it, for the, well, I lost count at this point. Then you went for some more hand wringing about civility.

The ICE raids have broken numerous laws, which is another thing you are ignoring. There are 0 precedents of masked "law enforcement" officers disappearing people from the streets and "mistakenly" deporting people in any country, including USA of 7 months ago, which is another thing you keep ignoring. Again, this is fine to you because you hate brown people so fuck them and fuck their due process.

2. oBlade:

You spend inordinate amount of time defending Trump and his policies, including the ones that are "gray area" and that were never used in the way that he's using them because you want to see brown people suffer, because you are, just like him a racist and a bad person.

I'm calling you a racist because you are a Tucker Carlson super-fan who spreads white replacement theory bullshit thinly veiled as "protecting sovereignty".

Also, just as a side note on your most hilarious and obvious omissions or non answers, SF school board voting = attack on sovereignty and lack of answering if you believe Trump's 2020 lies.

Both:

You guys should start a circus!



I told you, the executive already had the tools he needed, given to him by the legislature, under already existing laws. The point of bringing the legislature into it again was for the exact purpose of making a mess, not fixing the problem.

Things having no precedent are not illegal on that basis. I assume ICE is wearing masks to avoid doxxing. "Disappearing" people is primarily just another way to say "arrest" or "detain" things they are allowed to do. I'm already on record against deporting people to where they shouldn't go (although the government is not REQUIRED to deport people to their home country). Again it seems to be you don't want any enforcement at all. In LA, ICE got a warrant and executed on it. There was nothing underhanded in the raid so far as I'm aware. You are being (purposefully?) unclear here, I'm still left trying to figure out exactly what it is you are for or what you are at least ok with. While under some administrations it happens more or less than others, things like workplace raids are not illegal or unexpected.


Plenty of cases have come to light proving that ICE has arrested and detained legal citizens. Will you accept that you're wrong?

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/tracking-us-citizens-children-detained-deported-ice-trump-updates.html


Context I've provided earlier in this thread from this NPR article in 2011

A record 396,000 people were deported from the country during the federal fiscal year that just ended. Some were caught in raids, while others were detained by ICE after being arrested by local police.


Stevens looked at about 8,000 cases in just two immigration detention facilities. She found that about 1 percent of the time, people were eventually let go because they were U.S. citizens. However, that meant the citizens were held between one week and four years in detention.


Trump's numbers are nothing remarkable in terms of deportations or detention of legal U.S. citizens. In fact most estimates based on current trajectories indicate he won't even top Biden's last year in office.
Magic Powers
Profile Joined April 2012
Austria4478 Posts
Last Edited: 2025-06-12 06:27:07
June 12 2025 06:26 GMT
#100408
On June 12 2025 15:21 BlackJack wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 12 2025 14:59 Magic Powers wrote:
On June 12 2025 07:59 Introvert wrote:
On June 12 2025 01:24 Jankisa wrote:
1. Introvert:

Re: The immigration bill.

I asked you why would a party and their leader that is actually motivated by fixing this problem not work it through legislature, as the founders have intended and you completely ignored it, for the, well, I lost count at this point. Then you went for some more hand wringing about civility.

The ICE raids have broken numerous laws, which is another thing you are ignoring. There are 0 precedents of masked "law enforcement" officers disappearing people from the streets and "mistakenly" deporting people in any country, including USA of 7 months ago, which is another thing you keep ignoring. Again, this is fine to you because you hate brown people so fuck them and fuck their due process.

2. oBlade:

You spend inordinate amount of time defending Trump and his policies, including the ones that are "gray area" and that were never used in the way that he's using them because you want to see brown people suffer, because you are, just like him a racist and a bad person.

I'm calling you a racist because you are a Tucker Carlson super-fan who spreads white replacement theory bullshit thinly veiled as "protecting sovereignty".

Also, just as a side note on your most hilarious and obvious omissions or non answers, SF school board voting = attack on sovereignty and lack of answering if you believe Trump's 2020 lies.

Both:

You guys should start a circus!



I told you, the executive already had the tools he needed, given to him by the legislature, under already existing laws. The point of bringing the legislature into it again was for the exact purpose of making a mess, not fixing the problem.

Things having no precedent are not illegal on that basis. I assume ICE is wearing masks to avoid doxxing. "Disappearing" people is primarily just another way to say "arrest" or "detain" things they are allowed to do. I'm already on record against deporting people to where they shouldn't go (although the government is not REQUIRED to deport people to their home country). Again it seems to be you don't want any enforcement at all. In LA, ICE got a warrant and executed on it. There was nothing underhanded in the raid so far as I'm aware. You are being (purposefully?) unclear here, I'm still left trying to figure out exactly what it is you are for or what you are at least ok with. While under some administrations it happens more or less than others, things like workplace raids are not illegal or unexpected.


Plenty of cases have come to light proving that ICE has arrested and detained legal citizens. Will you accept that you're wrong?

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/tracking-us-citizens-children-detained-deported-ice-trump-updates.html


Context I've provided earlier in this thread from this NPR article in 2011

Show nested quote +
A record 396,000 people were deported from the country during the federal fiscal year that just ended. Some were caught in raids, while others were detained by ICE after being arrested by local police.


Show nested quote +
Stevens looked at about 8,000 cases in just two immigration detention facilities. She found that about 1 percent of the time, people were eventually let go because they were U.S. citizens. However, that meant the citizens were held between one week and four years in detention.


Trump's numbers are nothing remarkable in terms of deportations or detention of legal U.S. citizens. In fact most estimates based on current trajectories indicate he won't even top Biden's last year in office.


What exactly is your argument? I don't understand what you're saying.

My point:

Q: Has ICE committed crimes?
A: Yes

Your counter: ?
If you want to do the right thing, 80% of your job is done if you don't do the wrong thing.
BlackJack
Profile Blog Joined June 2003
United States10574 Posts
Last Edited: 2025-06-12 06:30:30
June 12 2025 06:28 GMT
#100409
On June 12 2025 15:17 Magic Powers wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 12 2025 13:24 BlackJack wrote:
On June 12 2025 13:01 KwarK wrote:
On June 12 2025 10:27 BlackJack wrote:
The news story says she confronted the officers and she was blocking the doors. If you get in between officers and someone they are trying to arrest you are obstructing them. It's fairly straightforward.

If the door is the entrance to a building and they have no warrant then she's not obstructing them because they have no right to enter the building in the first place.


The doors she is referring to are the car doors of the vehicle they were in so no concerns there


A car that is owned privately is considered private property in America and thus off-limits for law enforcement without a legal warrant.

Show nested quote +
No worries, mate. The arrest happened in public.


No worries, mate. You clearly don't know what constitutes "private property".


Ok my clothes are private property too. I'm off-limits for law enforcement unless I'm naked.

Like seriously, you think you can run onto a public street and interfere with police that have a car pulled over and you think it's not obstruction because the car is private property? Like why do we have to go nine rounds on the most ridiculous things?
Magic Powers
Profile Joined April 2012
Austria4478 Posts
June 12 2025 06:37 GMT
#100410
On June 12 2025 15:28 BlackJack wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 12 2025 15:17 Magic Powers wrote:
On June 12 2025 13:24 BlackJack wrote:
On June 12 2025 13:01 KwarK wrote:
On June 12 2025 10:27 BlackJack wrote:
The news story says she confronted the officers and she was blocking the doors. If you get in between officers and someone they are trying to arrest you are obstructing them. It's fairly straightforward.

If the door is the entrance to a building and they have no warrant then she's not obstructing them because they have no right to enter the building in the first place.


The doors she is referring to are the car doors of the vehicle they were in so no concerns there


A car that is owned privately is considered private property in America and thus off-limits for law enforcement without a legal warrant.

No worries, mate. The arrest happened in public.


No worries, mate. You clearly don't know what constitutes "private property".


Ok my clothes are private property too. I'm off-limits for law enforcement unless I'm naked.

Like seriously, you think you can run onto a public street and interfere with police that have a car pulled over and you think it's not obstruction because the car is private property? Like why do we have to go nine rounds on the most ridiculous things?


Ok we're done here. If you want to be a baby, be a baby to someone else.
If you want to do the right thing, 80% of your job is done if you don't do the wrong thing.
Uldridge
Profile Blog Joined January 2011
Belgium4957 Posts
Last Edited: 2025-06-12 06:42:35
June 12 2025 06:41 GMT
#100411
On June 12 2025 10:01 Sermokala wrote:
The problem with GH's "solutions", when he finally comes up to discuss them, end up being "yeah just burn the whole thing down and start from scratch" + Show Spoiler +
and the conversation never gets past how to actually reform or actually make the system better.

Hes not interested in the very real problems with things like policeing that makes it a job that ruins good people and enables bad people, he just wants to sit on his ivory tower and never get the mud of reality on his hands. Do you think if he gets a text to join a flash protest to an ICE raid, and finds that the hells angels are there to protest the raid as well, what will GH do? Hes not interested in learning about his local politics enough to know that slavery was on the ballot, and therefore couldn't fight for the issue. I went around my community to make sure the lottery take the state government gets is constitutionally mandated to go to nature initiatives, and my community is hella conservative.

Its a very real issue of leftism in America, the midwest actually got things done, organized well, won elections, and fought for reforms, only to get shit on by coastal leftists who were more than willing to burn everything down than compromise on their principles once. Good socialism is when you have a cabal of unelected technocrats with taxing authority running the economic development of your state. Its when you give free education on two year colleges. It's giving free health insurance to the poorest. Have you heard GH mention any of these things?


The actual actual problem is that sometimes burning it all down is the correct way forward because your entire system is so entangled and murky and procedural (proceduralism is power; drown them in paperwork; another tool for waging the class war)
But doing that takes on a workload that most aren't willing to wade into. The lives are comfortable enough now, who cares about the actual Kafkaesk, AI, drone policing, megastructure ultramarine bureaucratic nightmare our childrens children will have to live in?
Things are only going to get worse now that people don't wan't to make children anymore and the burden on the younger generations will only increase. They're our most precious assets yet we treat them like disposable scum because they'll have to take care of us??? Because the 55+ people have all the knowledge and wisdom and capital see! How will we innovate? I'm predicting a mandatory 2 year elderly care service for young adults in a year or 20 because we haven't done anythint to address the isssue structurally. So, yeah, burn it down could be a good thing sometimes.

Taxes are for Terrans
BlackJack
Profile Blog Joined June 2003
United States10574 Posts
June 12 2025 06:42 GMT
#100412
On June 12 2025 15:37 Magic Powers wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 12 2025 15:28 BlackJack wrote:
On June 12 2025 15:17 Magic Powers wrote:
On June 12 2025 13:24 BlackJack wrote:
On June 12 2025 13:01 KwarK wrote:
On June 12 2025 10:27 BlackJack wrote:
The news story says she confronted the officers and she was blocking the doors. If you get in between officers and someone they are trying to arrest you are obstructing them. It's fairly straightforward.

If the door is the entrance to a building and they have no warrant then she's not obstructing them because they have no right to enter the building in the first place.


The doors she is referring to are the car doors of the vehicle they were in so no concerns there


A car that is owned privately is considered private property in America and thus off-limits for law enforcement without a legal warrant.

No worries, mate. The arrest happened in public.


No worries, mate. You clearly don't know what constitutes "private property".


Ok my clothes are private property too. I'm off-limits for law enforcement unless I'm naked.

Like seriously, you think you can run onto a public street and interfere with police that have a car pulled over and you think it's not obstruction because the car is private property? Like why do we have to go nine rounds on the most ridiculous things?


Ok we're done here. If you want to be a baby, be a baby to someone else.


Pretty on brand for you. Smugly telling me "you must no know what constitutes private property" because you foolishly believe that police can't arrest someone in a car without a warrant and when I point on how ridiculous that is you pretend to throw a tantrum so you can bow out without having to defend your foolish belief.
Magic Powers
Profile Joined April 2012
Austria4478 Posts
Last Edited: 2025-06-12 06:46:31
June 12 2025 06:46 GMT
#100413
On June 12 2025 15:42 BlackJack wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 12 2025 15:37 Magic Powers wrote:
On June 12 2025 15:28 BlackJack wrote:
On June 12 2025 15:17 Magic Powers wrote:
On June 12 2025 13:24 BlackJack wrote:
On June 12 2025 13:01 KwarK wrote:
On June 12 2025 10:27 BlackJack wrote:
The news story says she confronted the officers and she was blocking the doors. If you get in between officers and someone they are trying to arrest you are obstructing them. It's fairly straightforward.

If the door is the entrance to a building and they have no warrant then she's not obstructing them because they have no right to enter the building in the first place.


The doors she is referring to are the car doors of the vehicle they were in so no concerns there


A car that is owned privately is considered private property in America and thus off-limits for law enforcement without a legal warrant.

No worries, mate. The arrest happened in public.


No worries, mate. You clearly don't know what constitutes "private property".


Ok my clothes are private property too. I'm off-limits for law enforcement unless I'm naked.

Like seriously, you think you can run onto a public street and interfere with police that have a car pulled over and you think it's not obstruction because the car is private property? Like why do we have to go nine rounds on the most ridiculous things?


Ok we're done here. If you want to be a baby, be a baby to someone else.


Pretty on brand for you. Smugly telling me "you must no know what constitutes private property" because you foolishly believe that police can't arrest someone in a car without a warrant and when I point on how ridiculous that is you pretend to throw a tantrum so you can bow out without having to defend your foolish belief.


Look it up. Privately owned cars are private property. They're called "effects".
If you want to do the right thing, 80% of your job is done if you don't do the wrong thing.
Turbovolver
Profile Blog Joined January 2009
Australia2394 Posts
June 12 2025 06:56 GMT
#100414
Just take off your shirt and stand on top of it, now you are "on private property" and you cannot be touched XD
The original Bogus fan.
Acrofales
Profile Joined August 2010
Spain18117 Posts
Last Edited: 2025-06-12 07:10:48
June 12 2025 07:09 GMT
#100415
On June 12 2025 15:46 Magic Powers wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 12 2025 15:42 BlackJack wrote:
On June 12 2025 15:37 Magic Powers wrote:
On June 12 2025 15:28 BlackJack wrote:
On June 12 2025 15:17 Magic Powers wrote:
On June 12 2025 13:24 BlackJack wrote:
On June 12 2025 13:01 KwarK wrote:
On June 12 2025 10:27 BlackJack wrote:
The news story says she confronted the officers and she was blocking the doors. If you get in between officers and someone they are trying to arrest you are obstructing them. It's fairly straightforward.

If the door is the entrance to a building and they have no warrant then she's not obstructing them because they have no right to enter the building in the first place.


The doors she is referring to are the car doors of the vehicle they were in so no concerns there


A car that is owned privately is considered private property in America and thus off-limits for law enforcement without a legal warrant.

No worries, mate. The arrest happened in public.


No worries, mate. You clearly don't know what constitutes "private property".


Ok my clothes are private property too. I'm off-limits for law enforcement unless I'm naked.

Like seriously, you think you can run onto a public street and interfere with police that have a car pulled over and you think it's not obstruction because the car is private property? Like why do we have to go nine rounds on the most ridiculous things?


Ok we're done here. If you want to be a baby, be a baby to someone else.


Pretty on brand for you. Smugly telling me "you must no know what constitutes private property" because you foolishly believe that police can't arrest someone in a car without a warrant and when I point on how ridiculous that is you pretend to throw a tantrum so you can bow out without having to defend your foolish belief.


Look it up. Privately owned cars are private property. They're called "effects".


Maybe stop digging? You're wrong. Own it. ICE are doing plenty wrong even if they didn't do this thing wrong.
BlackJack
Profile Blog Joined June 2003
United States10574 Posts
June 12 2025 07:09 GMT
#100416
On June 12 2025 15:56 Turbovolver wrote:
Just take off your shirt and stand on top of it, now you are "on private property" and you cannot be touched XD


You say that jokingly but I have little doubt that's an argument he would make if it suited him.

+ Show Spoiler +
I don't know what pronouns MP uses but I'm opting to go with he/him here over the more ambiguous they/them so nobody thinks I'm speaking in generalizations about other people in the thread. MP has some pretty unique ways of seeing things that doesn't apply to anyone else here so I wouldn't want anyone else to think "them" refers to them.
Magic Powers
Profile Joined April 2012
Austria4478 Posts
June 12 2025 07:29 GMT
#100417
On June 12 2025 16:09 Acrofales wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 12 2025 15:46 Magic Powers wrote:
On June 12 2025 15:42 BlackJack wrote:
On June 12 2025 15:37 Magic Powers wrote:
On June 12 2025 15:28 BlackJack wrote:
On June 12 2025 15:17 Magic Powers wrote:
On June 12 2025 13:24 BlackJack wrote:
On June 12 2025 13:01 KwarK wrote:
On June 12 2025 10:27 BlackJack wrote:
The news story says she confronted the officers and she was blocking the doors. If you get in between officers and someone they are trying to arrest you are obstructing them. It's fairly straightforward.

If the door is the entrance to a building and they have no warrant then she's not obstructing them because they have no right to enter the building in the first place.


The doors she is referring to are the car doors of the vehicle they were in so no concerns there


A car that is owned privately is considered private property in America and thus off-limits for law enforcement without a legal warrant.

No worries, mate. The arrest happened in public.


No worries, mate. You clearly don't know what constitutes "private property".


Ok my clothes are private property too. I'm off-limits for law enforcement unless I'm naked.

Like seriously, you think you can run onto a public street and interfere with police that have a car pulled over and you think it's not obstruction because the car is private property? Like why do we have to go nine rounds on the most ridiculous things?


Ok we're done here. If you want to be a baby, be a baby to someone else.


Pretty on brand for you. Smugly telling me "you must no know what constitutes private property" because you foolishly believe that police can't arrest someone in a car without a warrant and when I point on how ridiculous that is you pretend to throw a tantrum so you can bow out without having to defend your foolish belief.


Look it up. Privately owned cars are private property. They're called "effects".


Maybe stop digging? You're wrong. Own it. ICE are doing plenty wrong even if they didn't do this thing wrong.


Prove that I'm wrong.
If you want to do the right thing, 80% of your job is done if you don't do the wrong thing.
Fleetfeet
Profile Blog Joined May 2014
Canada2603 Posts
Last Edited: 2025-06-12 07:41:00
June 12 2025 07:39 GMT
#100418
On June 12 2025 16:29 Magic Powers wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 12 2025 16:09 Acrofales wrote:
On June 12 2025 15:46 Magic Powers wrote:
On June 12 2025 15:42 BlackJack wrote:
On June 12 2025 15:37 Magic Powers wrote:
On June 12 2025 15:28 BlackJack wrote:
On June 12 2025 15:17 Magic Powers wrote:
On June 12 2025 13:24 BlackJack wrote:
On June 12 2025 13:01 KwarK wrote:
On June 12 2025 10:27 BlackJack wrote:
The news story says she confronted the officers and she was blocking the doors. If you get in between officers and someone they are trying to arrest you are obstructing them. It's fairly straightforward.

If the door is the entrance to a building and they have no warrant then she's not obstructing them because they have no right to enter the building in the first place.


The doors she is referring to are the car doors of the vehicle they were in so no concerns there


A car that is owned privately is considered private property in America and thus off-limits for law enforcement without a legal warrant.

No worries, mate. The arrest happened in public.


No worries, mate. You clearly don't know what constitutes "private property".


Ok my clothes are private property too. I'm off-limits for law enforcement unless I'm naked.

Like seriously, you think you can run onto a public street and interfere with police that have a car pulled over and you think it's not obstruction because the car is private property? Like why do we have to go nine rounds on the most ridiculous things?


Ok we're done here. If you want to be a baby, be a baby to someone else.


Pretty on brand for you. Smugly telling me "you must no know what constitutes private property" because you foolishly believe that police can't arrest someone in a car without a warrant and when I point on how ridiculous that is you pretend to throw a tantrum so you can bow out without having to defend your foolish belief.


Look it up. Privately owned cars are private property. They're called "effects".


Maybe stop digging? You're wrong. Own it. ICE are doing plenty wrong even if they didn't do this thing wrong.


Prove that I'm wrong.


This argument has gone off the rails, though.

If "You're wrong" is proving that a car isn't private property, it won't happen. It's a stupid battle to fight, and I hope to god no one bothers. Nobody should be arguing whether or not police can enter your T-shirt, it's a fucking dumb tangent that doesn't mean anything.

Yes police can enter cars if they feel they can prove probable cause etc. That could be irrelevant for this argument because we're talking about ICE not 'the police', which may well have different guidelines that do not include 'probable cause'. It seems reasonable to consider it obstruction of justice if someone physically blocks the doorway to a home to prevent police from entering and arresting someone who just obviously committed a crime. That seems incredibly straightforward.

If you want to make the case that it wasn't what happened and ICE is at fault in this scenario, don't let BJ pull you off track into this odd tangent of police and cars. Especially don't let BJ pull you off track and then double down on this sidetrack shouting "FIGHT ME BRO". Stick with ICE and pregnant people in this specific scenario.
Magic Powers
Profile Joined April 2012
Austria4478 Posts
June 12 2025 07:43 GMT
#100419
On June 12 2025 16:39 Fleetfeet wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 12 2025 16:29 Magic Powers wrote:
On June 12 2025 16:09 Acrofales wrote:
On June 12 2025 15:46 Magic Powers wrote:
On June 12 2025 15:42 BlackJack wrote:
On June 12 2025 15:37 Magic Powers wrote:
On June 12 2025 15:28 BlackJack wrote:
On June 12 2025 15:17 Magic Powers wrote:
On June 12 2025 13:24 BlackJack wrote:
On June 12 2025 13:01 KwarK wrote:
[quote]
If the door is the entrance to a building and they have no warrant then she's not obstructing them because they have no right to enter the building in the first place.


The doors she is referring to are the car doors of the vehicle they were in so no concerns there


A car that is owned privately is considered private property in America and thus off-limits for law enforcement without a legal warrant.

No worries, mate. The arrest happened in public.


No worries, mate. You clearly don't know what constitutes "private property".


Ok my clothes are private property too. I'm off-limits for law enforcement unless I'm naked.

Like seriously, you think you can run onto a public street and interfere with police that have a car pulled over and you think it's not obstruction because the car is private property? Like why do we have to go nine rounds on the most ridiculous things?


Ok we're done here. If you want to be a baby, be a baby to someone else.


Pretty on brand for you. Smugly telling me "you must no know what constitutes private property" because you foolishly believe that police can't arrest someone in a car without a warrant and when I point on how ridiculous that is you pretend to throw a tantrum so you can bow out without having to defend your foolish belief.


Look it up. Privately owned cars are private property. They're called "effects".


Maybe stop digging? You're wrong. Own it. ICE are doing plenty wrong even if they didn't do this thing wrong.


Prove that I'm wrong.


This argument has gone off the rails, though.

If "You're wrong" is proving that a car isn't private property, it won't happen.

That's not what at's stake though - We're on the tail end of a thread that started from Kwark claiming it isn't obstruction if there isn't a warrant, and we're currently at "can police enter cars" which is a ridiculous place to be.

Yes police can enter cars if they can prove probable cause etc. That could be irrelevant for this argument because we're talking about ICE not 'the police', which may well have different guidelines that do not include 'probable cause'. It seems reasonable to consider it obstruction of justice if someone physically blocks the doorway to a home to prevent police from entering and arresting someone who just obviously committed a crime. That seems incredibly straightforward.

If you want to make the case that it wasn't what happened and ICE is at fault in this scenario, don't let BJ pull you off track into this odd tangent of police and cars. Stick with ICE and pregnant people in this specific scenario.


I disagree, I think It's time to make it as difficult as possible for all right-wingers at every step. Every single thing they say must be scrutinized to death, and it's no longer time for leniency. They've crossed too many lines so it's time that they face the consequences of their actions. One consequence must be that they can't say a single sentence unless they've proven it 100 times over.
If you want to do the right thing, 80% of your job is done if you don't do the wrong thing.
Fleetfeet
Profile Blog Joined May 2014
Canada2603 Posts
June 12 2025 07:46 GMT
#100420
On June 12 2025 16:43 Magic Powers wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 12 2025 16:39 Fleetfeet wrote:
On June 12 2025 16:29 Magic Powers wrote:
On June 12 2025 16:09 Acrofales wrote:
On June 12 2025 15:46 Magic Powers wrote:
On June 12 2025 15:42 BlackJack wrote:
On June 12 2025 15:37 Magic Powers wrote:
On June 12 2025 15:28 BlackJack wrote:
On June 12 2025 15:17 Magic Powers wrote:
On June 12 2025 13:24 BlackJack wrote:
[quote]

The doors she is referring to are the car doors of the vehicle they were in so no concerns there


A car that is owned privately is considered private property in America and thus off-limits for law enforcement without a legal warrant.

No worries, mate. The arrest happened in public.


No worries, mate. You clearly don't know what constitutes "private property".


Ok my clothes are private property too. I'm off-limits for law enforcement unless I'm naked.

Like seriously, you think you can run onto a public street and interfere with police that have a car pulled over and you think it's not obstruction because the car is private property? Like why do we have to go nine rounds on the most ridiculous things?


Ok we're done here. If you want to be a baby, be a baby to someone else.


Pretty on brand for you. Smugly telling me "you must no know what constitutes private property" because you foolishly believe that police can't arrest someone in a car without a warrant and when I point on how ridiculous that is you pretend to throw a tantrum so you can bow out without having to defend your foolish belief.


Look it up. Privately owned cars are private property. They're called "effects".


Maybe stop digging? You're wrong. Own it. ICE are doing plenty wrong even if they didn't do this thing wrong.


Prove that I'm wrong.


This argument has gone off the rails, though.

If "You're wrong" is proving that a car isn't private property, it won't happen.

That's not what at's stake though - We're on the tail end of a thread that started from Kwark claiming it isn't obstruction if there isn't a warrant, and we're currently at "can police enter cars" which is a ridiculous place to be.

Yes police can enter cars if they can prove probable cause etc. That could be irrelevant for this argument because we're talking about ICE not 'the police', which may well have different guidelines that do not include 'probable cause'. It seems reasonable to consider it obstruction of justice if someone physically blocks the doorway to a home to prevent police from entering and arresting someone who just obviously committed a crime. That seems incredibly straightforward.

If you want to make the case that it wasn't what happened and ICE is at fault in this scenario, don't let BJ pull you off track into this odd tangent of police and cars. Stick with ICE and pregnant people in this specific scenario.


I disagree, I think It's time to make it as difficult as possible for all right-wingers at every step. Every single thing they say must be scrutinized to death, and it's no longer time for leniency. They've crossed too many lines so it's time that they face the consequences of their actions. One consequence must be that they can't say a single sentence unless they've proven it 100 times over.


People will lose patience with you and ignore you a million times sooner than they'll ignore your opponents. You can watch that happen in real time here, if you'd like. Just continue as you are.
Prev 1 5019 5020 5021 5022 5023 5356 Next
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
IPSL
17:00
Ro16 Group D
ZZZero vs rasowy
Napoleon vs KameZerg
Liquipedia
PSISTORM Gaming Misc
15:55
FSL teamleague CNvsASH, ASHvRR
Freeedom30
Liquipedia
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
SteadfastSC 259
ROOTCatZ 113
IndyStarCraft 110
BRAT_OK 44
MindelVK 27
EmSc Tv 10
StarCraft: Brood War
Britney 26181
Calm 2787
Shuttle 786
Stork 378
firebathero 271
Dewaltoss 99
Leta 80
Mong 68
Barracks 67
Rock 42
[ Show more ]
Shine 14
zelot 10
Dota 2
Gorgc5557
qojqva1634
Dendi931
LuMiX1
Counter-Strike
ScreaM1136
byalli166
Heroes of the Storm
Khaldor494
Liquid`Hasu253
Other Games
Beastyqt510
DeMusliM308
Hui .223
Fuzer 204
Lowko203
Trikslyr46
CadenZie18
Organizations
Dota 2
PGL Dota 2 - Main Stream8063
Other Games
EGCTV599
gamesdonequick269
StarCraft 2
angryscii 20
EmSc Tv 10
EmSc2Tv 10
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 22 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• HeavenSC 69
• HappyZerGling 68
• davetesta1
• IndyKCrew
• sooper7s
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• Migwel
• intothetv
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Kozan
StarCraft: Brood War
• Airneanach38
• HerbMon 11
• Michael_bg 4
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
• BSLYoutube
Dota 2
• C_a_k_e 2068
• WagamamaTV362
• Ler73
League of Legends
• Nemesis3319
Other Games
• imaqtpie1062
• Shiphtur290
Upcoming Events
OSC
56m
BSL 21
1h 56m
Tarson vs Julia
Doodle vs OldBoy
eOnzErG vs WolFix
StRyKeR vs Aeternum
Sparkling Tuna Cup
15h 56m
RSL Revival
15h 56m
Reynor vs sOs
Maru vs Ryung
Kung Fu Cup
17h 56m
Cure vs herO
Reynor vs TBD
WardiTV Korean Royale
17h 56m
BSL 21
1d 1h
JDConan vs Semih
Dragon vs Dienmax
Tech vs NewOcean
TerrOr vs Artosis
IPSL
1d 1h
Dewalt vs WolFix
eOnzErG vs Bonyth
Replay Cast
1d 4h
Wardi Open
1d 17h
[ Show More ]
Monday Night Weeklies
1d 22h
WardiTV Korean Royale
2 days
BSL: GosuLeague
3 days
The PondCast
3 days
Replay Cast
4 days
RSL Revival
4 days
BSL: GosuLeague
5 days
RSL Revival
5 days
WardiTV Korean Royale
5 days
RSL Revival
6 days
WardiTV Korean Royale
6 days
IPSL
6 days
Julia vs Artosis
JDConan vs DragOn
Liquipedia Results

Completed

Proleague 2025-11-14
Stellar Fest: Constellation Cup
Eternal Conflict S1

Ongoing

C-Race Season 1
IPSL Winter 2025-26
KCM Race Survival 2025 Season 4
SOOP Univ League 2025
YSL S2
BSL Season 21
CSCL: Masked Kings S3
SLON Tour Season 2
RSL Revival: Season 3
META Madness #9
BLAST Rivals Fall 2025
IEM Chengdu 2025
PGL Masters Bucharest 2025
Thunderpick World Champ.
CS Asia Championships 2025
ESL Pro League S22
StarSeries Fall 2025
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025

Upcoming

BSL 21 Non-Korean Championship
Acropolis #4
IPSL Spring 2026
HSC XXVIII
RSL Offline Finals
WardiTV 2025
IEM Kraków 2026
BLAST Bounty Winter 2026
BLAST Bounty Winter 2026: Closed Qualifier
eXTREMESLAND 2025
ESL Impact League Season 8
SL Budapest Major 2025
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.