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.
On January 27 2026 01:23 Billyboy wrote: The most interesting thing I learned this weekend is that Kristi Noem and Kash Patel think Kyle Rittenhouse should have been tried and convicted of capital murder.
Conservatism: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.
OK now, do tell me how someone is to tell that ICE is "engaged in the performance of official duties" when they show up in unmarked vehicles, masked, with no identification of person or even agency they belong to and start performing crowd control which is not part of ICE duties? How are people to know they're even legit federal agents and not some bandit cosplayers?
You can't impede something that simply isn't happening.
On January 27 2026 00:30 oBlade wrote: If you have no ideas to contribute, do these massive all-encompassing strawmen. I'll pretend it was a good faith post and explain with my actual ideas.
The second amendment's utility as a check against tyranny, while I believe it exists, is largely theoretical. It's in the sense that social contract theory isn't about a real contract we all sign. It's just kind of an understanding there in the background. So if you actually think the government has become tyranny and want to fight it, you have to win. That's basically it. You seem to think I'm a conservative, and Christian, and maybe an NRA member or something.
You seem to embody all of those. You look like one, talk like one and quack like one. Maybe that makes you one? But you're right, upon deeper inspection, you don't explicitly ever say you support or are a member of any of these ideas/organisations. I only skimmed your second part, thought the agent was also beanbagged by rioters for some reasons. My bad.
This is the most telling single sentence, from you. Who do you think is doing this? Was this in reference to something specific?
I'm not saying anyone is necessarily doing any second amendmenting. I'm saying that the sentiment on the right is that the government should do their thing and any resistance to that- potential tyrannical overreach will be frowned upon from the side that is usually so pro gun rights and pro 2nd amendment. Politics only ever serves as a vehicle for control and power and not as a framework to iteratively better society. At least that's how it looks like when Republicans are able to get their greedy little claws viced around society. It's never a status quo or a compromise. It's always give them a finger and they'll take an arm.
Where are the Epstein files? Will you denounce Trump when they are released and he's extremely implicated in all 2 million documents?
ITT the defenders of ICE might not be dumb enough to try to construe some insane "reality" where that shooting was justified, but they did sure as fuck completely refuse to condemn it, call for an investigation or arrests and criticize anyone who has been lying their asses off on TV, Truth social and Shitter.
They do, however, have plenty of time for people who aren't in power federally and people who aren't in charge of ICE locally, but also didn't even try to command the local law enforcement to do their fucking jobs in protecting the local population.
I, for one, call for every person who kills or robs or beats up anyone to be jailed, given the ability to go out on bond and given a proper trial, no matter their legal status.
I also call for every DA and police officer who did not fallow the rules of engagement and prosecution to the letter to be investigated and potentially removed.
I would also love to see the officers who assault, use excessive force and ultimately shoot people in their fucking heads on cameras to be investigated, arrested and put to trial.
Too bad none of our conservative friends here are able to make these kind of statements because they are afraid that the government they love so much might hold it against them, they should get a medal for achievement in licking boots, they manage to do it directly form under it, that should count for something!
I guess they are still spewing their vile shit her because they think being white and a citizen will protect them, but they sure as hell don't think it will protect them from becoming undesirable due to their internet posting history.
Steven Nekhaila, the chair of the Libertarian National Committee, was unequivocal in the wake of a Border Patrol agent fatally shooting an American citizen in Minneapolis: Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) should be abolished, he said.
In a lengthy statement the Libertarian Party posted Saturday to the social platform X, Nekhaila said ICE “was created in a national security context, blending immigration enforcement with counterterrorism culture, equipment, and mindset.”
“Do not be fooled,” he added. “Every justification for state violence will be depersonalized, amplified, and systematized until it is a permanent feature of governance.”
“Abolish ICE. Reform the broken immigration system. Do not give the police state an inch.”
A memo signed by acting ICE Director Todd Lyons last year and obtained by The Associated Press earlier this week also authorized agency personnel to enter homes and arrest migrants without a judicial warrant, if they have a signed administrative warrant and a final order of removal issued by a judge.
The Fourth Amendment, though, protects individuals against “unreasonable searches and seizures” and requires authorities to obtain a warrant with probable cause to justify a search.
Nekhaila cited that memo Saturday, saying ICE is justifying its officers’ ability to enter homes without a judicial warrant via “an assertion by fiat, not a principle recognized by the Constitution, statute, or the courts.”
better late than never I guess... though to be honest for libertarian minded people way too late to remember what their job is. it has been a year of things going stupidly wrong at an alarming rate.
let's grow that tent to wipe out the scourge of Trumpism!
On January 27 2026 01:46 Jankisa wrote: Too bad none of our conservative friends here are able to make these kind of statements because they are afraid that the government they love so much might hold it against them, they should get a medal for achievement in licking boots, they manage to do it directly form under it, that should count for something!
I guess they are still spewing their vile shit her because they think being white and a citizen will protect them, but they sure as hell don't think it will protect them from becoming undesirable due to their internet posting history.
It's not due to fear, Jankisa. One in five republicans disapprove of ICE (this was before the latest execution), but the ones we have here are true believers that have peddled Great Replacement for 10+ years and built their identity on it. Making them watch videos of ICE operating in Minneapolis is like sending flat earthers to space, it makes them uncomfortable but it doesn't change anything, they're in too deep.
OK now, do tell me how someone is to tell that ICE is "engaged in the performance of official duties" when they show up in unmarked vehicles, masked, with no identification of person or even agency they belong to and start performing crowd control which is not part of ICE duties? How are people to know they're even legit federal agents and not some bandit cosplayers?
Organizations like "ICE Watch" in Minnesota know the people they are targeting are ICE. These are not random bystanders in the wrong place at the wrong time. They are there blasting whistles because they track ICE. Not because every day in Minnesota is a groundhog's day repeat of the Annual Airhorn Convention and ICE just stumbled on to it. And despite masks they almost always have some kind of insignia like on their vests.
The vehicles are unmarked so it's harder for agitators to track, and also so it, and they, don't tip off targets. There are not really cases of bandits pretending to be people not wearing uniforms. However, it's also possible for bandits to pretend to be people wearing uniforms. That's what "bandits" do. Heck, there could even be ruffians, highwaymen, rapscallions, even brigands and hoodlums. That'd be bad, and we should encourage local and state LEO should work together with the federal government in part to make sure such situations don't happen. So far most of the misidentification has been in the opposite direction, not people pretending to be ICE, but radicals thinking people in SUVs are ICE and asking them for their papers, like this: + Show Spoiler +
On January 27 2026 01:27 Manit0u wrote: You can't impede something that simply isn't happening.
Thousands of arrests in Minnesota since December, that's official business, that wasn't in their free time.
On January 27 2026 01:46 Jankisa wrote: ITT the defenders of ICE might not be dumb enough to try to construe some insane "reality" where that shooting was justified, but they did sure as fuck completely refuse to condemn it, call for an investigation or arrests and criticize anyone who has been lying their asses off on TV, Truth social and Shitter.
Surely impeding has to be a scale in which the severity of the attack on the citizen population and the severity of the emergency the agents are responding to matters.
Let’s set an extreme hypothetical at either end. Let’s say the agent is on their way to get donuts for an authorized enforcement briefing meeting when they discover an unauthorized civil rights march in the street. It would not be reasonable to plough a vehicle through the crowd killing dozens, despite being impeding. Now let’s say that they’re closing in on the illegal immigrant who ate every dog in 2024 but there’s information that the person will return to hiding in a few minutes before eating every cat, it might be reasonable to escort one person out of the street.
I think it is clear we can’t simply say “impeding” and then whatever action comes next is justified. There has to be a degree of nuance. And yet you keep resorting to that word without any reference to exactly what official business was being impeded.
You’d think that logically it must have had to be both important and very time sensitive because they decided to shove a female citizen to the ground for getting in the way. And yet it can’t have been that important because they all stopped doing official business to pepper spray and then execute the nurse who came to her aid.
In the scenario you’re picturing where the protesters were impeding and that impeding triggered this response from ICE, what do you picture them impeding? What kind of operation do you imagine being so disrupted by the conduct of that woman that this was the consequence? When I imagine someone impeding law enforcement I imagine a lot of scenarios where the best choice is simply to be impeded. Maybe have local police issue them a ticket after the event like they could have done with Goode once she was instructed to move her vehicle.
Make me a joke, say it, say that Trump, Noem and JD Vance are being irresponsible, rising the temperature and instead they should be calling for an investigation.
I see you clearly have issues with reading comprehension, so just to cover your "gotcha" I'm also referring to others here, such as the great scholar of boots Introvert and the "insurance premiums over protesting tyranny" Jimmy here.
Please, tell us what you think of people lying, constantly, about the victim here.
Is that fair? What does doing this about a person who was shoot in the head 2 days ago say about those people? Do you want them to remain being the president, the VP and the head of DHS? Is there anything these people could do to make them more worthy of criticism then the random morons yelling at people trying to rent cars? Who is a greater threat to republic, people who openly flaunt the law, impede investigations and laugh in the face of justice or random people making noise and doing a few tens of thousands of damage to a local collaborator business?
Tell us if you think that the people in charge of these people should tell them to turn them selves in and order the FBI and federal prosecutors to investigate this case.
On January 27 2026 02:25 KwarK wrote: Oblade, you keep saying impeding.
Surely impeding has to be a scale in which the severity of the attack on the citizen population and the severity of the emergency the agents are responding to matters.
Let’s set an extreme hypothetical at either end. Let’s say the agent is on their way to get donuts for an authorized enforcement briefing meeting when they discover an unauthorized civil rights march in the street. It would not be reasonable to plough a vehicle through the crowd killing dozens, despite being impeding. Now let’s say that they’re closing in on the illegal immigrant who ate every dog in 2024 but there’s information that the person will return to hiding in a few minutes before eating every cat, it might be reasonable to escort one person out of the street.
Yes, impeding per se is not enough for lethal force, you need a threat for that.
On January 27 2026 02:25 KwarK wrote: I think it is clear we can’t simply say “impeding” and then whatever action comes next is justified. There has to be a degree of nuance. And yet you keep resorting to that word without any reference to exactly what official business was being impeded.
ICE's job is to arrest people in violation of immigration law. Since December *in MN, they've arrested 3000+ people, examples of which I listed above. You believe most immigration violations are visa overstays, not border crossings, so I know you appreciate the need for interior enforcement. That's what they're doing every day.
On January 27 2026 02:25 KwarK wrote: You’d think that logically it must have had to be both important and very time sensitive because they decided to shove a female citizen to the ground for getting in the way. And yet it can’t have been that important because they all stopped doing official business to pepper spray and then execute the nurse who came to her aid.
I see you're only talking about the Pretti case. This is "time began when the video started" syndrome. The Minneapolis crackdown has been going on for months, as has the "protestor" response. Pepper spray's great. It's instant and nonlethal. If it were a random occurrence I might expect more yelling "get back" and "we're police" and "what do you think you're doing" and "you're going to get arrested." But these are specific groups engaged in repeated behaviors.
On January 27 2026 02:25 KwarK wrote: In the scenario you’re picturing where the protesters were impeding and that impeding triggered this response from ICE, what do you picture them impeding? What kind of operation do you imagine being so disrupted by the conduct of that woman that this was the consequence? When I imagine someone impeding law enforcement I imagine a lot of scenarios where the best choice is simply to be impeded. Maybe have local police issue them a ticket after the event like they could have done with Goode once she was instructed to move her vehicle.
KwarK is aware the underlying issue is local police in this area do not cooperate with the federal government. They would not be around to "issue them a ticket." At the express instructions of the state and city leadership, who are under investigation that they've been served grand jury subpoenas for.
There is certainly wiggle room in how the police respond. However, they don't have to wiggle the way a certain person expects they should have to, and trying to litigate that on the street versus them physically is an asinine endeavor. Don't go up to cops thinking you can convince them to make enough room in their schedule to be protested at.
OK now, do tell me how someone is to tell that ICE is "engaged in the performance of official duties" when they show up in unmarked vehicles, masked, with no identification of person or even agency they belong to and start performing crowd control which is not part of ICE duties? How are people to know they're even legit federal agents and not some bandit cosplayers?
Organizations like "ICE Watch" in Minnesota know the people they are targeting are ICE. These are not random bystanders in the wrong place at the wrong time. They are there blasting whistles because they track ICE. Not because every day in Minnesota is a groundhog's day repeat of the Annual Airhorn Convention and ICE just stumbled on to it. And despite masks they almost always have some kind of insignia like on their vests.
The vehicles are unmarked so it's harder for agitators to track, and also so it, and they, don't tip off targets. There are not really cases of bandits pretending to be people not wearing uniforms. However, it's also possible for bandits to pretend to be people wearing uniforms. That's what "bandits" do. Heck, there could even be ruffians, highwaymen, rapscallions, even brigands and hoodlums. That'd be bad, and we should encourage local and state LEO should work together with the federal government in part to make sure such situations don't happen. So far most of the misidentification has been in the opposite direction, not people pretending to be ICE, but radicals thinking people in SUVs are ICE and asking them for their papers, like this:
This is why police, military, utility, transport, and pretty much any government worker outside of ICE that interacts with public have badge numbers, name plates, and official vehicles.
On January 27 2026 02:25 KwarK wrote: Oblade, you keep saying impeding.
Surely impeding has to be a scale in which the severity of the attack on the citizen population and the severity of the emergency the agents are responding to matters.
Let’s set an extreme hypothetical at either end. Let’s say the agent is on their way to get donuts for an authorized enforcement briefing meeting when they discover an unauthorized civil rights march in the street. It would not be reasonable to plough a vehicle through the crowd killing dozens, despite being impeding. Now let’s say that they’re closing in on the illegal immigrant who ate every dog in 2024 but there’s information that the person will return to hiding in a few minutes before eating every cat, it might be reasonable to escort one person out of the street.
Yes, impeding per se is not enough for lethal force, you need a threat for that.
On January 27 2026 02:25 KwarK wrote: I think it is clear we can’t simply say “impeding” and then whatever action comes next is justified. There has to be a degree of nuance. And yet you keep resorting to that word without any reference to exactly what official business was being impeded.
ICE's job is to arrest people in violation of immigration law. Since December *in MN, they've arrested 3000+ people, examples of which I listed above. You believe most immigration violations are visa overstays, not border crossings, so I know you appreciate the need for interior enforcement. That's what they're doing every day.
Who knows what ICE is doing. I've heard the numbers 2k, 3k, 10k, 12k all in the past couple days. Meanwhile they're collecting people from MN jails and claiming them as arrests from this surge, falsley reporting on the amount of immigrants in MN jails, collecting valid refugees with documents going through the legal asylum process, and more that all make anything they say hard to believe.
On January 27 2026 02:25 KwarK wrote: Oblade, you keep saying impeding.
Surely impeding has to be a scale in which the severity of the attack on the citizen population and the severity of the emergency the agents are responding to matters.
Let’s set an extreme hypothetical at either end. Let’s say the agent is on their way to get donuts for an authorized enforcement briefing meeting when they discover an unauthorized civil rights march in the street. It would not be reasonable to plough a vehicle through the crowd killing dozens, despite being impeding. Now let’s say that they’re closing in on the illegal immigrant who ate every dog in 2024 but there’s information that the person will return to hiding in a few minutes before eating every cat, it might be reasonable to escort one person out of the street.
Yes, impeding per se is not enough for lethal force, you need a threat for that.
On January 27 2026 02:25 KwarK wrote: I think it is clear we can’t simply say “impeding” and then whatever action comes next is justified. There has to be a degree of nuance. And yet you keep resorting to that word without any reference to exactly what official business was being impeded.
ICE's job is to arrest people in violation of immigration law. Since December *in MN, they've arrested 3000+ people, examples of which I listed above. You believe most immigration violations are visa overstays, not border crossings, so I know you appreciate the need for interior enforcement. That's what they're doing every day.
Who knows what ICE is doing. I've heard the numbers 2k, 3k, 10k, 12k all in the past couple days. Meanwhile they're collecting people from MN jails and claiming them as arrests from this surge, falsley reporting on the amount of immigrants in MN jails, collecting valid refugees with documents going through the legal asylum process, and more that all make anything they say hard to believe.
Many people are saying this administration decreased drug prices by 2000%, with such competence and efficiency surely they can deport a meager 300% of the world's criminals.
Trump has done the impossible and united republicans and democrats against himself. This is the same guy who literally counseled Renee Good's murderer.
Republican Chris Madel is ending his campaign for governor of Minnesota, saying that he cannot support the national members of his party and their "retribution on the citizens of our state."
Madel said he supported the original stated purpose of Operation Metro Surge — to detain the "worst of the worst" migrants who are in the country illegally — but said the operation has "expanded far beyond its stated focus on true public safety threats."
"I cannot support the national Republicans stated retribution on the citizens of our state, nor can I count myself a member of a party that would do so," Madel said.[...]Madel also said local Republican leaders have done nothing to investigate fraud in the state, which is the purported reason for Operation Metro Surge and the 3,000 federal agents who have since descended on Minnesota.
On January 27 2026 02:25 KwarK wrote: Oblade, you keep saying impeding.
Surely impeding has to be a scale in which the severity of the attack on the citizen population and the severity of the emergency the agents are responding to matters.
Let’s set an extreme hypothetical at either end. Let’s say the agent is on their way to get donuts for an authorized enforcement briefing meeting when they discover an unauthorized civil rights march in the street. It would not be reasonable to plough a vehicle through the crowd killing dozens, despite being impeding. Now let’s say that they’re closing in on the illegal immigrant who ate every dog in 2024 but there’s information that the person will return to hiding in a few minutes before eating every cat, it might be reasonable to escort one person out of the street.
Yes, impeding per se is not enough for lethal force, you need a threat for that.
On January 27 2026 02:25 KwarK wrote: I think it is clear we can’t simply say “impeding” and then whatever action comes next is justified. There has to be a degree of nuance. And yet you keep resorting to that word without any reference to exactly what official business was being impeded.
ICE's job is to arrest people in violation of immigration law. Since December *in MN, they've arrested 3000+ people, examples of which I listed above. You believe most immigration violations are visa overstays, not border crossings, so I know you appreciate the need for interior enforcement. That's what they're doing every day.
On January 27 2026 02:25 KwarK wrote: You’d think that logically it must have had to be both important and very time sensitive because they decided to shove a female citizen to the ground for getting in the way. And yet it can’t have been that important because they all stopped doing official business to pepper spray and then execute the nurse who came to her aid.
I see you're only talking about the Pretti case. This is "time began when the video started" syndrome. The Minneapolis crackdown has been going on for months, as has the "protestor" response. Pepper spray's great. It's instant and nonlethal. If it were a random occurrence I might expect more yelling "get back" and "we're police" and "what do you think you're doing" and "you're going to get arrested." But these are specific groups engaged in repeated behaviors.
On January 27 2026 02:25 KwarK wrote: In the scenario you’re picturing where the protesters were impeding and that impeding triggered this response from ICE, what do you picture them impeding? What kind of operation do you imagine being so disrupted by the conduct of that woman that this was the consequence? When I imagine someone impeding law enforcement I imagine a lot of scenarios where the best choice is simply to be impeded. Maybe have local police issue them a ticket after the event like they could have done with Goode once she was instructed to move her vehicle.
KwarK is aware the underlying issue is local police in this area do not cooperate with the federal government. They would not be around to "issue them a ticket." At the express instructions of the state and city leadership, who are under investigation that they've been served grand jury subpoenas for.
There is certainly wiggle room in how the police respond. However, they don't have to wiggle the way a certain person expects they should have to, and trying to litigate that on the street versus them physically is an asinine endeavor. Don't go up to cops thinking you can convince them to make enough room in their schedule to be protested at.
So you're not willing to say what specific situation was being impeded that required them to start assaulting that woman?
If you're going to go with "in extreme cases it's justifiable and in this case the situation was so dire they had to" then when I go "wow, that's crazy, tell me more" you really should have something. Anything.
Also "the local police probably wouldn't do anything so what were they meant to do, not assault citizens?" certainly is a take.
Anyone want to explain how it's part of ICE's official duties to show up to vigils/memorial services for their victims and harassing the people mourning
On January 27 2026 04:55 LightSpectra wrote: Anyone want to explain how it's part of ICE's official duties to show up to vigils/memorial services for their victims and harassing the people mourning
Contrast this with the minnesota national guard who has taken over protecting the ICE detention facility and a few other locations. They didn't want to be mistaken for ICE so they've all been issued high visibility vests and are showing their face. Instead of tear gas and pepper spray, they're deploying doughnuts, coffee, and hot chocolate at the protestors.
Its really shitty right now I was out for ICE running around even my rural neighborhood yesterday. Its well worth noting that most of the ICE arrests are pretty bunk, a lot of the ones they've reported are people they pick up as they leave jail. There are countless more cases of them pointing their guns at people, kidnapping them into their vans, and then just leaving them in random places. They rip people out of their homes without letting them get any clothes on for the cold, and then when its confirmed its not the people they're looking for they just drive off.
With how violent, undisciplined, and rapacious they are to even children, there is no reason any organization should partner with or be associated with ICE. They lie about things that can be easily disproven and in every opertunity chose to prove that they're everything they're accused of being.
Remember Kyle Rittenhouse? That shitbird actually killed people he brought his gun to and brandished publicly. But beacuse the person is from Minnesota they don't deserve their constitutional rights and should be killed for them.
They need to do a proper investigation into the most recent death for proper closure. Getting rid of Bovino won't do it. Claiming that "distracting an ICE Officer" is a 100% for-sure felony is too much of a legal stretch. Also, his other comments speculating on what Pretti "wanted to do" or "intended to do" were irresponsible. After a thorough background investigation into his past and some digging into exactly what he was doing in the hours leading up to his death might permit a good guess about Pretti's intentions. However, Bovino had no such information. Bovino just started "going into business for himself".
I think I said earlier that some of Trump's biggest sycophants are limiting their careers with their comments right after tragic events and before thorough examinations and investigations had been done. Bondi and Noem are borked. When the political winds shift, and they always do, no one is going to trust them.
Guys like Scott Bessent should STFU and stick to economic growth projections...
Howard Lutnick has been strangely silent. Smart move on his part.
On January 27 2026 02:25 KwarK wrote: Oblade, you keep saying impeding.
Surely impeding has to be a scale in which the severity of the attack on the citizen population and the severity of the emergency the agents are responding to matters.
Let’s set an extreme hypothetical at either end. Let’s say the agent is on their way to get donuts for an authorized enforcement briefing meeting when they discover an unauthorized civil rights march in the street. It would not be reasonable to plough a vehicle through the crowd killing dozens, despite being impeding. Now let’s say that they’re closing in on the illegal immigrant who ate every dog in 2024 but there’s information that the person will return to hiding in a few minutes before eating every cat, it might be reasonable to escort one person out of the street.
Yes, impeding per se is not enough for lethal force, you need a threat for that.
On January 27 2026 02:25 KwarK wrote: I think it is clear we can’t simply say “impeding” and then whatever action comes next is justified. There has to be a degree of nuance. And yet you keep resorting to that word without any reference to exactly what official business was being impeded.
ICE's job is to arrest people in violation of immigration law. Since December *in MN, they've arrested 3000+ people, examples of which I listed above. You believe most immigration violations are visa overstays, not border crossings, so I know you appreciate the need for interior enforcement. That's what they're doing every day.
On January 27 2026 02:25 KwarK wrote: You’d think that logically it must have had to be both important and very time sensitive because they decided to shove a female citizen to the ground for getting in the way. And yet it can’t have been that important because they all stopped doing official business to pepper spray and then execute the nurse who came to her aid.
I see you're only talking about the Pretti case. This is "time began when the video started" syndrome. The Minneapolis crackdown has been going on for months, as has the "protestor" response. Pepper spray's great. It's instant and nonlethal. If it were a random occurrence I might expect more yelling "get back" and "we're police" and "what do you think you're doing" and "you're going to get arrested." But these are specific groups engaged in repeated behaviors.
On January 27 2026 02:25 KwarK wrote: In the scenario you’re picturing where the protesters were impeding and that impeding triggered this response from ICE, what do you picture them impeding? What kind of operation do you imagine being so disrupted by the conduct of that woman that this was the consequence? When I imagine someone impeding law enforcement I imagine a lot of scenarios where the best choice is simply to be impeded. Maybe have local police issue them a ticket after the event like they could have done with Goode once she was instructed to move her vehicle.
KwarK is aware the underlying issue is local police in this area do not cooperate with the federal government. They would not be around to "issue them a ticket." At the express instructions of the state and city leadership, who are under investigation that they've been served grand jury subpoenas for.
There is certainly wiggle room in how the police respond. However, they don't have to wiggle the way a certain person expects they should have to, and trying to litigate that on the street versus them physically is an asinine endeavor. Don't go up to cops thinking you can convince them to make enough room in their schedule to be protested at.
So you're not willing to say what specific situation was being impeded that required them to start assaulting that woman?
If you're going to go with "in extreme cases it's justifiable and in this case the situation was so dire they had to" then when I go "wow, that's crazy, tell me more" you really should have something. Anything.
Also "the local police probably wouldn't do anything so what were they meant to do, not assault citizens?" certainly is a take.
This pretty much sums up how people defending ICE seem to me.
EPT
![[image loading]](https://tl.net/staff/KwarK/libertarians.png)
