Tag Archives: Stephen Miller

MSNBC: New report shows how Trump’s DHS is mainstreaming white supremacy

Posted on by
Reply

The SPLC’s Hatewatch looked at how the Department of Homeland Security has ramped up its bigoted social media strategy in recent months.

Under President Donald Trump, the Department of Homeland Security’s social media channels are beginning to look like a white nationalist content mill, churning out bigoted, jingoistic schlock.

A recent report from Hatewatch, the extremism watchdog run by the Southern Poverty Law Center, shows how the agency and top Trump administration officials have ramped up their promotion of white nationalist or anti-immigrant social media posts since June, when the agency reposted anti-immigrant propaganda that originated from an avowedly racist social media account.

MSNBC has noted the agency’s propaganda in the past, including their use of cruel memes that vilify nonwhite immigrants and of American artworks to promote themes of ethnic cleansing.

The Hatewatch report takes a comprehensive look at these incidents since June, citing an apparent increase in racist propaganda as part of what the watchdog calls “an escalating trend in American immigration enforcement toward overt use of white nationalist and anti-immigrant myths to recruit personnel and justify departmental operations.”

The Department of Homeland Security didn’t immediately respond to MSNBC’s request for comment on Hatewatch’s claims. When asked last month by NBC’s Los Angeles affiliate about the campaign, the DHS called its digital strategy “bold and effective.”

Here’s one example Hatewatch flagged:

In one recruitment poster, published on Aug. 11, a white Uncle Sam caricature in the style of a Norman Rockwell painting stands at a crossroads of directional signs that include such phrases as “INVASION,” “CULTURAL DECLINE,” “HOMELAND” and “LAW & ORDER.” The poster includes the caption “Which way, American man?” — which appears to be a nod to the influential white nationalist text Which Way Western Man? by William Gayley Simpson. Published by an imprint associated with the neo-Nazi National Alliance, the book is a reflection and critique of society from Simpson’s travels. While critical of some aspects of society, it largely frames Western civilization as superior and veers into sexist and antisemitic commentary.

To some online observers, like author and conspiracy theory expert Mike Rothschild, this apparent nod to an unabashed bigot was hardly subtle

….

The report notes that multiple Trump administration figures in senior leadership roles have ties to racist organizations or have been known to espouse white nationalist themes. That includes border czar Tom Homan, who collaborated with anti-Muslim hate group The United West on his “Defend the Border” project, and White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller, whose white nationalist views first came under scrutiny during Trump’s first term.

The report also refers to multiple posts from DHS that promote the idea of forging friendships or strengthening familial bonds over the targeting of immigrants. And it notes that the agency’s social media strategy has been celebrated by known white supremacists like activist Jared Taylor, who called the posts a “remarkable change” during an episode of his podcast in August.

That’s certainly one way to describe the Department of Homeland Security’s embrace of racist propaganda to further the Trump administration’s draconian anti-immigrant agenda.

New report shows how Trump’s DHS is mainstreaming white supremacy
The SPLC’s Hatewatch looked at how the Department of Homeland Security has ramped up its bigoted social media strategy in recent months.

https://www.msnbc.com/top-stories/latest/homeland-security-social-media-white-supremacy-rcna228582

Reuters: These Trump voters back his immigration crackdown, but some worry about his methods

Posted on by
Reply

While Trump supporters are happy to see criminals deported, they are split over methods for detaining immigrants.

Juan Rivera voted for President Donald Trump, hoping that the president’s efforts to rid the United States of illegal immigration would improve safety in the Southern California city where the 25-year-old content creator lives.

Neighborhoods near Rivera’s home in San Marcos that used to be frequented by migrants with “violent tendencies” do feel much safer now, he said. But he also said he’ll “never forget” seeing U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents pull over a truck of Latino workers and haul the men into their cars without asking for identification, leaving the empty truck behind.

Some of Rivera’s family members work for U.S. Border Patrol. Other relatives who are in the process of establishing legal residency in the United States “are scared of going to work because they fear that they’re going to get pulled over by immigration,” he said.

Overall, however, Rivera gave the Trump administration very high marks on its handling of immigration because “there’s a lot more public safety.”

Seven months into his second term, Trump’s signature issue – immigration – is still helping buoy his overall sinking approval ratings, making up for a downturn in support for his economic policies. A group of 20 Trump voters Reuters has interviewed monthly since February, including Rivera, illuminated the complex views behind the numbers.

Reuters asked the voters to rate the Trump administration’s handling of immigration on a scale of 1 to 10. Sixteen gave it a rating of 7 or higher, and none rated it below 5.

They universally support Trump’s tightening of U.S. border security to prevent further illegal immigration and his efforts to expel immigration offenders with violent criminal records. But there was less consensus about how Trump is going about the crackdown.

“President Trump was elected based on his promise to close the border and deport criminal illegal aliens,” said White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson in an emailed statement. “The Trump Administration will continue carrying out the largest mass deportation operation in history.”

The 20 voters were selected from 429 respondents to a February 2025 Ipsos poll who said they voted for Trump in November and were willing to speak to a reporter. They are not a statistically representative portrait of all Trump voters, but their ages, educational backgrounds, races/ethnicities, locations and voting histories roughly correspond to those of Trump’s overall electorate.

Seven of the voters said they worried about the means Trump was using to achieve his goals, with some recoiling at the way authorities are rounding up immigrants for deportation.

“I agree that you have to have an immigration policy and enforce it. I don’t agree with kidnapping people off the street,” said Virginia Beach-based retiree Don Jernigan.

Jernigan, 75, said that footage of ICE raids he has seen on ABC and Fox News “reminds me of Nazi Germany. And you would rarely hear me say that name, Nazi, okay? But it does, the way they snatch people.”

Other voters, such as Will Brown, 20, a student at the University of Wisconsin – Madison, urged the administration to pursue even more ambitious deportation goals.

Brown, who said he “couldn’t be more of a fan of Stephen Miller,” the White House aide credited with designing Trump’s immigration policy, noted that the deportation rate of Trump’s second term so far lagged that of the last two Democratic administrations. “Honestly, I don’t think they’re doing enough,” he said.

REALITY DIVIDE

The voters’ attitudes towards traditional news outlets heavily affected their view of Trump’s immigration crackdown.

“If you get your information from one source, ICE is devils incarnate, and if you get it from another source, they’re superheroes,” said Gerald Dunn, 66, a martial arts instructor in upstate New York.

Dunn said he rarely reads or watches news from mainstream outlets because “everything is so exaggerated.” Instead, he browses headlines and watches YouTube videos to stay informed.

He has heard reports of ICE agents detaining non-criminal immigrants, but said such incidents are blown out of proportion.

“You’re going to arrest people wrongfully, and it turns out they shouldn’t have been arrested. That doesn’t mean you don’t arrest anybody.”

In the Chicago suburbs, municipal office secretary Kate Mottl, 62, said she is thrilled with Trump’s immigration policy. She does not believe news outlets that report immigrants without a criminal record are being swept up in raids.

Mottl was dismayed to learn that some immigrants without legal status she knows are afraid of being deported under Trump.

“I tell them, ‘you shouldn’t be worried about that because you’re not a bad person. You’re not committing crimes,’” she said, adding that she feared they were being misinformed by the news sources they watch.

CLEARER PATHWAY TO LEGAL STATUS

Fourteen of the 20 voters said they hoped Trump would improve the immigration system and vetting process to help deserving foreigners with the potential to contribute to the U.S. economy legalize their status more easily in the United States.

Like Mottl, Lesa Sandberg of St. George, Utah, said she knows undocumented immigrants “who are raising their families here, who are working, who are contributing to our economy and our society. And my heart goes out to them.”

Sandberg, 57, who runs an accounting business, rents properties and works for a former Republican congressman’s political action committee, said she is glad to see the administration cracking down on immigrants with criminal backgrounds.

But when it comes to the immigrants in the U.S. illegally she considers friends, she said, “I would never call ICE on them … [it’s] that whole concept of when we know people in the situation, feelings are different about it because we know how bad it is for them.”

David Ferguson, 53, a mechanical engineer and account manager in western Georgia, said some of the foreign students in his daughter’s graduate school program want to stay and work in the United States but fear they won’t be able to re-enter if they visit their home countries, despite having valid visas.

Some immigrants really do “want to have long-term residency and be productive members of our society. Let’s give them a path for that,” he said.

Ferguson said he doesn’t think an amnesty program is necessarily the solution. But Juan Rivera, the Trump voter in southern California, thinks it could attract wide support.

“It’s actually a really big sentiment I’ve been hearing from a lot of local Republican elected officials, that the Trump administration [should] offer amnesty the way that Reagan did,” said Rivera, who does Latino outreach advocacy for his county’s Republican Party.

His own father was able to become a U.S. citizen after former Republican President Ronald Reagan signed legislation in 1986 granting amnesty to about 3 million immigrants without legal status, according to Rivera.

He said he hopes Trump moves the country toward “an immigration system that balances security with humanity.”

These Trump voters back his immigration crackdown, but some worry about his methods

https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/these-trump-voters-back-his-immigration-crackdown-some-worry-about-his-methods-2025-09-02

Slate: I’ve Covered Immigration for a Decade. I’ve Never Seen the Government Do This Before.

Posted on by
Reply

It’s the ultimate extrapolation of an alarming Trump administration strategy.

Kilmar Abrego Garcia has spent the past several months on an involuntary tour of detention centers at home and abroad. Back in March, Immigration and Customs Enforcement picked up the Maryland dad and took him to immigration detention facilities in Louisiana and then Texas before the U.S. government flew him to the notorious Salvadoran megaprison CECOT—which Trump administration officials have admitted was a mistake.

Months after a federal judge ordered him returned to the U.S., he was brought back in June and immediately taken into criminal custody in Tennessee before he was once again ordered released, at which point he was swiftly put back into ICE custody and shuttled to a facility in Virginia. Over the course of a few months, Abrego Garcia has been in at least three immigration detention facilities, one criminal facility, and a foreign gulag entirely unauthorized to receive U.S. detainees, all while the government has failed at every attempt to establish a clear legal basis for his detention. It is effectively ferrying him from one type of custody to another only when it skirts close to being in open contempt of court.

According to Abrego Garcia’s lawyers, he was offered a plea deal for the thin trafficking charge federal prosecutors are pursuing against him with the promise that he would then be deported to Costa Rica; if he refused, federal authorities would instead send him to Uganda, a country he’s never been to. That’s exactly what Trump officials then moved to do before the same federal judge ruled that he could not be deported until at least early October while she considered the legality of their deportation efforts; in the interim, Abrego García is renewing his application for asylum. This is the first time in a decade of covering immigration that I can recall the explicit use of a removal location as a cudgel to gain compliance, especially in a separate criminal matter.

It’s easy to lump this odyssey in with the rest of the Trump-era immigration enforcement spectacle, but I’d argue that it is more of an avatar for the collapse of various systems into an all-encompassing expression of government power. Lawyers, journalists, and researchers have long used the term crimmigration to refer to the interplay between the criminal and civil immigration systems—how a criminal charge can trigger immigration consequences, for example. Still, due process generally demands some independence between the processes; except where explicitly laid out in law, you shouldn’t be able to bundle them together, in the same way that it would be obviously improper to, say, threaten someone with a tax investigation unless they plead guilty to unrelated charges.

Yet since the beginning of Abrego Garcia’s ordeal, the government has been trying to make his case about essentially whatever will stick, flattening the immigration and criminal aspects into one sustained character attack. It attempted to justify his deportation by tarring him as a gang member, an accusation that was based on comically flimsy evidence and which the government never tried to escalate to proving in court. Per internal Department of Justice whistleblower emails, officials desperately cast about for scraps of evidence to paint him as a hardened MS-13 leader and basically struck out.

After a federal judge ordered that he be brought back, the Justice Department devoted significant resources to retroactively drumming up charges over a three-year-old incident that police didn’t act on at the time, in which the government’s main witness, unlike Abergo Garcia, is a convicted felon. It is so flimsy that his lawyers are pursuing the rare defense of vindictive prosecution, pointing out the obvious fact that the criminal charge was ginned up as punishment and PR in itself.

It’s not that the specific contours of the legal cases are immaterial or that we shouldn’t pay attention to the arguments and evidence that the administration is trotting out (or, as the case may be, attempting to manufacture). These things all create precedent and they signal what the administration is willing to do and how judges can or will exercise their power. But we shouldn’t lose sight of the fact that the specifics of the immigration and criminal cases are effectively beyond the point, and this is all really about bringing the awesome weight of the government down to bear on a designated enemy.

The administration is attempting to create a situation where Abrego Garcia cannot actually win, even if he does ultimately succeed in his immigration and criminal cases. His life has become untenable despite the fact that the administration has, despite dedicating significant resources to the search, failed to produce any conclusive evidence that he is a public danger or a criminal or really anything but the normal “Maryland man” descriptor that they’ve taken such issue with. This is an effort to demonstrate to everyone the Trump administration might consider an enemy that it has both the will and capacity to destroy their lives by a thousand cuts.

Abrego Garcia is perhaps the most acute example because he sits at the intersection of an array of vulnerabilities: he is a noncitizen without clear-cut legal status, is not wealthy, has had criminal justice contact in the past, and is a Latino man, a demographic that right-wing figures have spent years trying to paint as inherently dangerous. Each of these characteristics provides a certain amount of surface area for the government to hook onto in order to punish him for the offense of making them look bad through the self-admitted error of deporting him illegally.

This is unforgivable for reasons that go beyond ego or malice; as Trump and officials like Stephen Miller move to tighten their authoritarian grip in areas of political opposition, they’re relying partly on might but also partly on a sense of infallibility and inevitability. To put in court documents that they erred in removing this one man to one of the most hellish places on Earth is, in their view, to call the entire legitimacy of their enterprise into question, and that cannot stand.

It is more useful to look at Abrego Garcia’s case as the ultimate extrapolation of this strategy, which is being deployed to various extents against administration opponents like, for example, Federal Reserve board governor Lisa Cook. Trump is attempting to fire her ostensibly over allegations of mortgage fraud, though the administration itself is barely even pretending that this is anything but the easiest and quickest entry point they could find to come after an ideological opponent, or at least a potential obstacle. If Cook had had some hypothetical immigration issue, the administration would almost certainly have latched onto that instead. It’s all a means to an end.

I’ve Covered Immigration for a Decade. I’ve Never Seen the Government Do This Before.
This case is the ultimate extrapolation of an alarming Trump administration strategy.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2025/08/trump-news-immigration-kilmar-abrego-garcia-deportation-removal.html

NBC News: ‘They’re going to be brought down’: Trump vows to go after Biden’s advisers

Posted on by
Reply

President Donald Trump on Monday called his predecessor’s team “evil people.”

President Donald Trump on Monday said he would target former President Joe Biden’s circle, calling them “evil people.”

“There were some brilliant people,” Trump said, referring to Biden’s allies in his White House. “But they’re evil people, and they’re going to be brought down. They have to be brought down ’cause they really hurt our country.”

Trump’s threat to have his political opponent’s allies “brought down” marks his latest move to potentially target political adversaries in a pattern that has alarmed critics who paint the president as pursuing retribution and say he is weaponizing the Justice Department — a claim the president has made about the Biden administration.

Biden’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Trump made the comments during lengthy remarks in the Oval Office, where the president and his allies made a series of claims about the impact of his anti-crime efforts in D.C. and top officials took turns heaping praise on him. While signing executive orders that aim to do away with cash bail, Trump repeatedly focused on the murder rate in the city, saying it had not seen a single person killed in 11 days — a change that he has been brandishing in recent days as he touts his administration’s efforts to address D.C. crime. That push has included federalizing the D.C. police force, deploying the National Guard and stepping up the federal law enforcement presence in the city.

Trump claimed that it has been “many years” since D.C. went a week without a murder. Publicly available crime data from the Metropolitan Police Department, however, indicate that D.C. went 16 days without a murder earlier this year, from Feb. 25 to March 12.

Trump argued that the city’s restaurants are experiencing a “boomtown,” a comment that is uncertain, as restaurant employees in a D.C. neighborhood with a large immigrant community told NBC News last week that business was declining due to Trump’s policies. His deputy chief of staff, Stephen Miller, who attended the signing with Vice President JD Vance, Attorney General Pam Bondi, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, claimed that people in D.C. had resumed wearing jewelry and carrying purses because of Trump’s anti-crime push.

“They’re wearing jewelry again. They’re carrying purses again,” Miller said. “People had changed their whole lives in this city for fear of being murdered, mugged and carjacked. It is a literal statement that President Trump has freed 700,000 people in this city who were living under the rule of criminals and thugs.”

At the start of the operation, though, crime in D.C. was down 26% compared to last year. Many city residents, too, have slammed the deployments and said it is scaring Washingtonians.

The president has frequently claimed that Democrats weaponized the Justice Department and other law enforcement agencies against him, pointing to his criminal indictments related to efforts to overturn the 2020 election and his handling of classified documents, as well as his conviction related to falsifying business records, which were dropped when he was elected to a second term. Trump repeatedly denied any wrongdoing in the cases against him.

Democrats have gone after Trump’s comments, arguing that the Trump administration’s several investigations into his political foes constitute the exact weaponization that he claimed they pursued against him.

The Justice Department is investigating Sen. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., and New York Attorney General Letitia James on allegations of mortgage fraud.

James led a civil fraud case against Trump, and Schiff served as the lead House manager in Trump’s first impeachment trial. They denied any wrongdoing.

NBC News has also previously reported that the Justice Department is in the initial stages of an investigation into James’ handling of her civil fraud case against Trump, which her attorney likened to a “political retribution campaign.”

Trump also threatened Friday to fire a Federal Reserve governor, Lisa Cook, if she did not resign after facing separate accusations of mortgage fraud. Cook said she won’t step down.

On Monday night, Trump said he was removing Cook from her post. Trump has been highly critical of the Federal Reserve for not adjusting interest rates as he would like.

And late last week, the FBI searched the home of former national security adviser John Bolton. A source familiar with the matter told NBC News at the time that the search was part of a “national security investigation in search of classified records.” Bolton did not respond to NBC News’ request for comment Friday.

Also on Monday, Trump left the door open to investigating former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, a staunch critic of Trump who was among the Republicans who ran against him for president. Trump was referring to a 12-year-old scandal called “Bridgegate.“

“If they want to look at it, they can,” Trump said, responding to a question about whether the White House planned to investigate Christie. “You can ask Pam. I think we have other things to do, but I always thought he got away with murder.”

On Sunday, after Christie criticized him on ABC News’ “This Week,” Trump wrote on his social media site Truth Social, “For the sake of JUSTICE, perhaps we should start looking at that very serious situation again?”

Meanwhile, Trump’s allies in Congress have pushed to hear testimony from Biden’s circle about his mental acuity while in office, which Trump and Republicans claim was in decline but was covered up by the former president’s team. House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., has sought testimony from Biden’s former White House physician Dr. Kevin O’Connor and former White House aides, including his domestic policy adviser, Neera Tanden and his deputy chief of staff, Annie Tomasini.

‘They’re going to be brought down’: Trump vows to go after Biden’s advisers
President Donald Trump on Monday called his predecessor’s team “evil people.”

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/-going-brought-trump-vows-go-bidens-advisers-rcna227019

Washington Post: Democrats are pushing back against crackdown on sanctuary cities

Posted on by
Reply

Some responded with strongly worded letters. Others spoke out publicly, accusing Attorney General Pam Bondi of trying to unlawfully bully governors and mayors.

Democratic state and local officials are forcefully pushing back against threats from Attorney General Pam Bondi that their jurisdictions could be stripped of federal funding or they could face criminal prosecution if they don’t back away from “sanctuary” policies friendly toward suspected undocumented immigrants.

Bondi last week sent a letter to leaders of more than 30 Democratic-led cities, counties and states that accused the jurisdictions of interfering with federal immigration enforcement.

Some responded with their own strongly worded letters. Others seized the moment to speak out in a public show of resistance, accusing Bondi of trying to unlawfully bully governors and mayors amid the political divide over President Donald Trump’s aggressive immigration tactics.

But what happens next remains deeply unclear, according to those Democratic officials, who have described the events of the past week as startling and unprecedented, even against the backdrop of the tumultuous launch of the second Trump term. They are staying mum so far about how much they are coordinating with each other to combat potential actions by the administration.

In Seattle, Mayor Bruce Harrell (D), who is seeking a second term, told The Washington Post that the Aug. 13 letter from Bondi warned that his “jurisdiction” had been “identified as one that engages in sanctuary policies and practices that thwart federal immigration enforcement.” It did not reference his city by name, mention specific local laws or policy, or cite Seattle’s crime rates, which Harrell pointed out are “down in all major categories.”

Days later, he was standing behind Washington Gov. Bob Ferguson (D), who had received a nearly identical letter.

“A letter like this cannot be normalized,” Ferguson said Tuesday, speaking to reporters at the state Capitol in Olympia. He called the attorney general’s threats a “breathtaking” tactic aimed at pressuring elected officials to “bend a knee” to Trump.

Ferguson told Bondi in a letter that his state “will not be bullied or intimidated by threats and legally baseless accusations.”

On the opposite coast, Boston Mayor Michelle Wu (D) stepped onto the plaza outside City Hall for a news conference that quickly took on the feel of an anti-Trump rally.

“Stop attacking our cities to hide your administration’s failures,” said Wu, the daughter of Taiwanese immigrants. “Boston follows the law, and Boston will not back down from who we are and what we stand for.”

The Trump administration’s intensifying efforts to identify and deport suspected undocumented immigrants include the deployment of thousands of Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers in U.S. cities as they seek to meet a directive from White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller to make at least 3,000 arrests a day.

Bondi and other Trump administration officials have insisted on cooperation from state and local officials, including access to law enforcement facilities and, in some cases, officers as they seek to step up deportation efforts.

Trump last week ordered the deployment of National Guard troops to D.C. and has sought to expand federal control over D.C. police, claiming the city was not doing enough to stem violent crime. He has indicated that cities like Baltimore, Chicago and New York could be next, likening them to urban hellscapes ruined by crime and lawlessness. All three cities are listed as sanctuary jurisdictions on federal government websites.

On Thursday, Trump reiterated his pledge to pursue similar crime crackdowns in Democratic-led cities.

In an interview last week with Fox News, Bondi suggested a takeover could be on the table for any city the administration deems out of compliance with federal immigration laws. “You better be abiding by our federal policies and with our federal law enforcement, because if you aren’t, we’re going to come after you,” she said.

Numerous city and state officials in their letters to Bondi questioned the legality of the Trump administration’s threats against their jurisdictions, with some pointedly critical of Trump’s actions in D.C. and in Los Angeles, where the president — despite the opposition of state and local officials — activated National Guard troops amid protests over the administration’s immigration arrests.

Responding to a letter sent to Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker (D), Ann Spillane, the governor’s general counsel, noted federal courts had repeatedly upheld an Illinois law that restricts state law enforcement involvement in immigration enforcement. Spillane said that Illinois officers’ primary focus is fighting crime and that they routinely cooperate with federal law enforcement on those issues. “We have not observed that type of coordination with local law enforcement in Washington, D.C. or Los Angeles,” Spillane wrote, according to a copy of the letter obtained by The Post.

Bondi’s letters also arrived at the offices of Colorado Gov. Jared Polis (D) and Denver Mayor Mike Johnston (D). Trump homed in on the state during the presidential race last year, baselessly claiming one of its cities had been overrun by Venezuelan gangs.

Johnston’s city has already lost millions in federal grants intended for migrant shelters, and the Justice Department sued him, Polis, and other state and local officials in May over what it called “disastrous” sanctuary policies. Colorado law bars local police officers from asking a person for their immigration status, arresting someone based only on that status and giving that personal information to federal authorities.

“It is immaterial to whether or not you were doing 55 in a 45, where you were born, and so we don’t ask for that information,” Johnston said. “We don’t have that information.” On Thursday, he remained adamant that Denver had not violated any laws. Bondi’s allegations, he said, are “false and offensiveOn Thursday, Trump reiterated his pledge to pursue similar crime crackdowns in Democratic-led cities.

In an interview last week with Fox News, Bondi suggested a takeover could be on the table for any city the administration deems out of compliance with federal immigration laws. “You better be abiding by our federal policies and with our federal law enforcement, because if you aren’t, we’re going to come after you,” she said.

Numerous city and state officials in their letters to Bondi questioned the legality of the Trump administration’s threats against their jurisdictions, with some pointedly critical of Trump’s actions in D.C. and in Los Angeles, where the president — despite the opposition of state and local officials — activated National Guard troops amid protests over the administration’s immigration arrests.

Responding to a letter sent to Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker (D), Ann Spillane, the governor’s general counsel, noted federal courts had repeatedly upheld an Illinois law that restricts state law enforcement involvement in immigration enforcement. Spillane said that Illinois officers’ primary focus is fighting crime and that they routinely cooperate with federal law enforcement on those issues. “We have not observed that type of coordination with local law enforcement in Washington, D.C. or Los Angeles,” Spillane wrote, according to a copy of the letter obtained by The Post.

Bondi’s letters also arrived at the offices of Colorado Gov. Jared Polis (D) and Denver Mayor Mike Johnston (D). Trump homed in on the state during the presidential race last year, baselessly claiming one of its cities had been overrun by Venezuelan gangs.

Johnston’s city has already lost millions in federal grants intended for migrant shelters, and the Justice Department sued him, Polis, and other state and local officials in May over what it called “disastrous” sanctuary policies. Colorado law bars local police officers from asking a person for their immigration status, arresting someone based only on that status and giving that personal information to federal authorities.

“It is immaterial to whether or not you were doing 55 in a 45, where you were born, and so we don’t ask for that information,” Johnston said. “We don’t have that information.” On Thursday, he remained adamant that Denver had not violated any laws. Bondi’s allegations, he said, are “false and offensive.”

In his letter to Bondi, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz (D) questioned Bondi’s demand that he identify how he’s working to eliminate laws, policies and practices that she claimed impede federal immigration enforcement.

“In a democracy, governors do not unilaterally ‘eliminate laws.’ The role of the executive is to take care that the laws are faithfully executed, not to pick and choose which to follow,” wrote Walz, the 2024 Democratic nominee for vice president. “In Minnesota, we take pride in following the law.”

New York Mayor Eric Adams, who promised to toughen immigration enforcement in his city after the Trump administration dropped corruption charges against him this spring, did not respond directly to Bondi’s letter. The task was passed on to the city’s corporation counsel, who sent a two-paragraph letter that said the city was not thwarting federal immigration policies but operating under a “system of federalism” that means states and cities do not have to undertake federal mandates.

Kayla Mamelak Altus, a spokeswoman for Adams, said the city was taking Trump’s threat to possibly target New York seriously and preparing for any scenario. But she declined to reveal what that playbook might look like.

In Washington, Ferguson, who previously served as the state’s attorney general before he was elected governor in November, said he had anticipated some dramatic action from the Trump administration. Late last year, before he was sworn into office, Ferguson spoke to state finance officials to determine how the state would fare fiscally if it lost federal funding, which makes up 28 percent of the budget.

But Ferguson did not anticipate Bondi’s threat to potentially prosecute him or any other elected official in the country over differences in policy. As attorney general, he had been the first to file a lawsuit over Trump’s 2017 executive order to ban visitors and refugees from several predominantly Muslim countries.

On Tuesday, Ferguson recalled trying to reassure his 8-year-old daughter at the time, who worried something might happen to him for challenging Trump.

“I remember telling her … ‘We’re lucky to live in a country right where your dad, or any American, can speak out against the president, where your dad can file a lawsuit against the president, say things that are pretty direct about the president, be critical,’” Ferguson recalled.

It was something they shouldn’t take for granted, he told her, because in other countries people could get sent to jail for something like that.

Eight years later, Ferguson said he didn’t know what he would say to his daughter now of that freedom to challenge a president. “Maybe I’m not so sure about that,” the governor said.

Democrats are pushing back against crackdown on sanctuary cities
Some responded with strongly worded letters. Others spoke out publicly, accusing Attorney General Pam Bondi of trying to unlawfully bully governors and mayors.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2025/08/22/sanctuary-cities-bondi

No paywall:

Democrats are pushing back against crackdown on sanctuary cities

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/democrats-are-pushing-back-against-crackdown-on-sanctuary-cities/ar-AA1L119n

The Grio: Trump calls D.C. neighborhoods ‘slums’ as critics say comments show bias against Black residents

Posted on by
Reply

D.C. residents and leaders warn that President Donald Trump’s “crime emergency” in the nation’s capital signals an authoritarian tough-on-crime approach to public safety that will be replicated in other cities.

Residents of Washington, D.C., are continuing to push back against the narratives about their city as military troops and federal officers swarm the streets as part of the Trump administration’s declared 30-day crime emergency.

“It’s offensive, it’s dangerous, and it’s discriminatory to look at the part of the city, that is majority Black and has been so historically, and define them as slums and crime ridden when we’re communities and every neighborhood is different,” said Gregory Jackson, a longtime public safety advocate who lives in Ward 8.

Despite local police data showing a 30-year low crime rate throughout D.C., Trump announced a federal crackdown in the city on Aug. 11, describing the state of crime in the nation’s capital as a “situation of complete and total lawlessness.” He told reporters that day, “We’re getting rid of the slums.”

When asked on Tuesday to clarify whether Trump is referring to homeless encampments or residential buildings as “slums,” White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said the president was referring to “the most dangerous communities, neighborhoods and streets in this city where, unfortunately, violence has ravaged these communities and taken the lives of…far too many law-abiding D.C. residents.”

On Friday, President Donald Trump told reporters that D.C. was a “hellhole” before his federal crackdown, declaring “now it’s safe.” The president said of out-of-town visitors: “They’re not going to go home in a body bag. They’re not going home in a coffin.”

Jackson, who served as deputy director of the White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention under President Joe Biden, said painting a broad brush of the city is “extremely harmful” to Black communities in D.C.

“It’s disrespectful to the families that are there, to the working professionals. On my street, there are young families, there are folks in the military, I served in the White House–we are made up of very diverse family folks and community-centric folks,” he told theGrio.

Courtney Snowden, a sixth-generation Washingtonian and former D.C. deputy mayor, said D.C. neighborhoods are comprised of “amazing” residents who are “committed to the success of the city.”

“[They’re] doing what people do in neighborhoods all across the country. They get up and they go to work every day, they contribute and pay their taxes, and they’re raising families,” Snowden told theGrio. “So to have the president of the United States and his cabinet members talking about American citizens and District residents and the communities in which they live in that way is appalling.”

On Wednesday, White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller, the architect of Trump’s anti-DEI agenda, said the surge of law enforcement and the National Guard is for the “safety” of the city’s majority Black residents.

Critics who spoke to theGrio said they don’t believe the Trump administration’s stated concerns about crime, and caring about the safety of its residents are “genuine.”

Jamal Holtz, president of the D.C. Young Democrats, noted D.C. “isn’t even among the top 10 most dangerous in the nation.” In fact, three of the top ten cities are in Ohio, which sent additional National Guard troops to D.C. in a show of political support for Trump’s D.C. crackdown.

“This isn’t about a need for public safety. Autocrats have used false pretenses and narratives to take over local matters and take over local law enforcement as a first step towards a broader power grab,” Holtz told theGrio.

“If he’s willing to overturn democracy in D.C. over the false narrative of a crime emergency here in the District of Columbia, I think it should scare all Americans that this will likely happen to communities across the nation,” said Markus Batchelor, political director at People For the American Way and D.C. native.

Critics of the Trump White House say that rather than working with D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser and local officials to continue the progress already made in making D.C. streets safer, they’ve turned to a tough-on-crime approach to public safety that has proven ineffective without other community intervention programs and investments.

Several mayors of inner cities have touted Biden-era investments and support in community violence intervention strategies as part of the success of reducing crime. However, the Trump administration slashed those funds and programs. The Department of Homeland Security also slashed a $20 million security grant for D.C. earlier this month. Additionally, a bill that would restore a $1 billion deficit in D.C.’s budget, which includes public safety funding, remains stalled in the Republican-controlled Congress.

“Does Washington, D.C., like every other major city in America, have this problem with crime? Absolutely. Are some of those issues exacerbated by, quite frankly, politicians like Trump, who are disinvesting in the inner city, public education, housing, and good-paying jobs? Yes,” said Batchelor.

Jackson, the former White House official, said of Trump’s D.C. crackdown, “A lot of this is a reaction rather than looking at the real strategy that we know can save lives and prevent violence, and really doubling down and supporting a city that does need support.” He said the city “does have work to do,” emphasized it “does not need military forces patrolling communities that don’t even have a grocery store.”

On Friday, Trump announced he will ask Congress for $2 billion to “rebuild” the District of Columbia, including updating roads and light poles. “This place will be beautified within a period of months,” said Trump, who did not indicate whether any of that funding would cover public safety.

Leaders say they’re also concerned about the physical and psychological impact of having troops, federal officers, and military tanks all across city streets.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth ordered that the National Guard to be armed, escalating their presence in D.C.

“It reinforces a stereotype that Black and brown folks are seen as a threat first and a human second,” said Jackson, who recalled being treated like a suspect when he was shot by a stray bullet in 2013.

“Now you could just be walking home from school and be interrogated. Some folks are sitting on their porch and have officers running up on them,” he told theGrio. “It really just reinforces that Black folks in this country, especially in the eyes of the Trump administration, are seen more as a threat and a suspect than Americans or neighbors.”

What do you expect from an unrepentant racist who was sued several times for refusing to rent his New York City apartments to blacks?

Trump calls D.C. neighborhoods “slums” as critics say comments show bias against Black residents
D.C. residents warn Trump’s “crime emergency” signals a tough-on-crime approach to public safety to be replicated in other cities.

https://thegrio.com/2025/08/22/trump-calls-d-c-neighborhoods-slums-as-critics-say-comments-show-bias-against-black-residents

Washington Post: Democrats are pushing back against crackdown on sanctuary cities

Posted on by
Reply

Some responded with strongly worded letters. Others spoke out publicly, accusing Attorney General Pam Bondi of trying to unlawfully bully governors and mayors.

Democratic state and local officials are forcefully pushing back against threats from Attorney General Pam Bondi that their jurisdictions could be stripped of federal funding or they could face criminal prosecution if they don’t back away from “sanctuary” policies friendly toward suspected undocumented immigrants.

Bondi last week sent a letter to leaders of more than 30 Democratic-led cities, counties and states that accused the jurisdictions of interfering with federal immigration enforcement.

Some responded with their own strongly worded letters. Others seized the moment to speak out in a public show of resistance, accusing Bondi of trying to unlawfully bully governors and mayors amid the political divide over President Donald Trump’s aggressive immigration tactics.

But what happens next remains deeply unclear, according to those Democratic officials, who have described the events of the past week as startling and unprecedented, even against the backdrop of the tumultuous launch of the second Trump term. They are staying mum so far about how much they are coordinating with each other to combat potential actions by the administration.

In Seattle, Mayor Bruce Harrell (D), who is seeking a second term, told The Washington Post that the Aug. 13 letter from Bondi warned that his “jurisdiction” had been “identified as one that engages in sanctuary policies and practices that thwart federal immigration enforcement.” It did not reference his city by name, mention specific local laws or policy, or cite Seattle’s crime rates, which Harrell pointed out are “down in all major categories.”

Days later, he was standing behind Washington Gov. Bob Ferguson (D), who had received a nearly identical letter.

“A letter like this cannot be normalized,” Ferguson said Tuesday, speaking to reporters at the state Capitol in Olympia. He called the attorney general’s threats a “breathtaking” tactic aimed at pressuring elected officials to “bend a knee” to Trump.

Ferguson told Bondi in a letter that his state “will not be bullied or intimidated by threats and legally baseless accusations.”

On the opposite coast, Boston Mayor Michelle Wu (D) stepped onto the plaza outside City Hall for a news conference that quickly took on the feel of an anti-Trump rally.

“Stop attacking our cities to hide your administration’s failures,” said Wu, the daughter of Taiwanese immigrants. “Boston follows the law, and Boston will not back down from who we are and what we stand for.”

The Trump administration’s intensifying efforts to identify and deport suspected undocumented immigrants include the deployment of thousands of Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers in U.S. cities as they seek to meet a directive from White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller to make at least 3,000 arrests a day.

Bondi and other Trump administration officials have insisted on cooperation from state and local officials, including access to law enforcement facilities and, in some cases, officers as they seek to step up deportation efforts.

Trump last week ordered the deployment of National Guard troops to D.C. and has sought to expand federal control over D.C. police, claiming the city was not doing enough to stem violent crime. He has indicated that cities like Baltimore, Chicago and New York could be next, likening them to urban hellscapes ruined by crime and lawlessness. All three cities are listed as sanctuary jurisdictions on federal government websites.

On Thursday, Trump reiterated his pledge to pursue similar crime crackdowns in Democratic-led cities.

In an interview last week with Fox News, Bondi suggested a takeover could be on the table for any city the administration deems out of compliance with federal immigration laws. “You better be abiding by our federal policies and with our federal law enforcement, because if you aren’t, we’re going to come after you,” she said.

Numerous city and state officials in their letters to Bondi questioned the legality of the Trump administration’s threats against their jurisdictions, with some pointedly critical of Trump’s actions in D.C. and in Los Angeles, where the president — despite the opposition of state and local officials — activated National Guard troops amid protests over the administration’s immigration arrests.

Responding to a letter sent to Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker (D), Ann Spillane, the governor’s general counsel, noted federal courts had repeatedly upheld an Illinois law that restricts state law enforcement involvement in immigration enforcement. Spillane said that Illinois officers’ primary focus is fighting crime and that they routinely cooperate with federal law enforcement on those issues. “We have not observed that type of coordination with local law enforcement in Washington, D.C. or Los Angeles,” Spillane wrote, according to a copy of the letter obtained by The Post.

Bondi’s letters also arrived at the offices of Colorado Gov. Jared Polis (D) and Denver Mayor Mike Johnston (D). Trump homed in on the state during the presidential race last year, baselessly claiming one of its cities had been overrun by Venezuelan gangs.

Johnston’s city has already lost millions in federal grants intended for migrant shelters, and the Justice Department sued him, Polis, and other state and local officials in May over what it called “disastrous” sanctuary policies. Colorado law bars local police officers from asking a person for their immigration status, arresting someone based only on that status and giving that personal information to federal authorities.

“It is immaterial to whether or not you were doing 55 in a 45, where you were born, and so we don’t ask for that information,” Johnston said. “We don’t have that information.” On Thursday, he remained adamant that Denver had not violated any laws. Bondi’s allegations, he said, are “false and offensive.”

In his letter to Bondi, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz (D) questioned Bondi’s demand that he identify how he’s working to eliminate laws, policies and practices that she claimed impede federal immigration enforcement.

“In a democracy, governors do not unilaterally ‘eliminate laws.’ The role of the executive is to take care that the laws are faithfully executed, not to pick and choose which to follow,” wrote Walz, the 2024 Democratic nominee for vice president. “In Minnesota, we take pride in following the law.”

New York Mayor Eric Adams, who promised to toughen immigration enforcement in his city after the Trump administration dropped corruption charges against him this spring, did not respond directly to Bondi’s letter. The task was passed on to the city’s corporation counsel, who sent a two-paragraph letter that said the city was not thwarting federal immigration policies but operating under a “system of federalism” that means states and cities do not have to undertake federal mandates.

Kayla Mamelak Altus, a spokeswoman for Adams, said the city was taking Trump’s threat to possibly target New York seriously and preparing for any scenario. But she declined to reveal what that playbook might look like.

In Washington, Ferguson, who previously served as the state’s attorney general before he was elected governor in November, said he had anticipated some dramatic action from the Trump administration. Late last year, before he was sworn into office, Ferguson spoke to state finance officials to determine how the state would fare fiscally if it lost federal funding, which makes up 28 percent of the budget.

But Ferguson did not anticipate Bondi’s threat to potentially prosecute him or any other elected official in the country over differences in policy. As attorney general, he had been the first to file a lawsuit over Trump’s 2017 executive order to ban visitors and refugees from several predominantly Muslim countries.

On Tuesday, Ferguson recalled trying to reassure his 8-year-old daughter at the time, who worried something might happen to him for challenging Trump.

“I remember telling her … ‘We’re lucky to live in a country right where your dad, or any American, can speak out against the president, where your dad can file a lawsuit against the president, say things that are pretty direct about the president, be critical,’” Ferguson recalled.

It was something they shouldn’t take for granted, he told her, because in other countries people could get sent to jail for something like that.

Eight years later, Ferguson said he didn’t know what he would say to his daughter now of that freedom to challenge a president. “Maybe I’m not so sure about that,” the governor said.

Democrats are pushing back against crackdown on sanctuary cities
Some responded with strongly worded letters. Others spoke out publicly, accusing Attorney General Pam Bondi of trying to unlawfully bully governors and mayors.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2025/08/22/sanctuary-cities-bondi

Also here without the paywall:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/democrats-are-pushing-back-against-crackdown-on-sanctuary-cities/ar-AA1L119n

Another Bullshit ‘Assaulting An ICE Officer’ Case Falls Apart In Front Of A Grand JuryPlease expect delivery within the day.

Posted on by
Reply

The number of assaults on ICE officers was always going to increase. There’s no way it wouldn’t, not when ICE was sending out a task force composed of multiple federal law enforcement agencies daily to multiple locations in the United States, hoping to finally hit the baseline number of 3,000 arrests per day by Stephen Miller.

A massive increase in interactions was bound to result in an increase in alleged assaults. The surprising fact, however, was that the increase was so low. To hear the DHS tell it, ICE officers are being beaten to the ground daily, with spokespeople constantly posting eye-popping stats like a 690% increase in assaults. (Since then, the percentage has increased to nearly 1000%.)

But all that really meant — when the DHS decided to finally be honest about it — was that there had been 69 more assaults this year as compared to last year (79 to 10). And when you have the actual numbers, this supposed “war on ICE” looks more like ICE officers complaining a bit more than they did last year.

Well, ICE officers brought it on themselves. Their insistence on wearing masks, stripping themselves of identifying badges, driving unmarked vehicles, hanging around in courtroom hallways, chasing day laborers across Home Deport parking lots, lurking in rented moving vans, etc. all but ensured there would be the occasional violent reaction to the sudden appearance of masked kidnappers who somehow can’t manage to obtain the occasional judicial warrant.

The DHS is relying on its ever-increasing percentage to sell this skewed narrative. Unfortunately for ICE, DHS, and the DOJ, the narrative isn’t holding up in court. Not only are ICE’s tactics being shut down by federal courts, DOJ prosecutors can’t even sneak bullshit charges past grand juries — entities that are normally extremely receptive of the one-sided presentations made by government lawyers.

Late last month, the DOJ issued a press release touting one of its latest wins: the charging of DC resident Sydney Reid with assaulting ICE officers. DC US attorney, former Fox talking head Jeanine Pirro, made the announcement, using these words to describe what (allegedly) occurred during this so-called altercation:

The FBI agent was assisting two ICE Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) officers outside the jail when Reid walked up close to the officers and started recording video. After multiple commands to step back, Reid tried to go around the ERO officers, placing herself between FBI agents and one of the suspects being transferred into their custody.

As Reid tried to impede the transfer, one of the ERO officers pushed her against the wall and told her to stop. Reid continued to struggle and fight with the officer. The FBI agent tried to help the officer control Reid who was flailing her arms and kicking. During Reid’s active resistance to being detained, the FBI agent’s hand was injured from striking and scraping the cement wall causing lacerations while the FBI agent was assisting ICE ERO officers.

LOL. Arm “flailing” is apparently assault, especially if an officer manages to injure themselves during the incident. This was enough for the DOJ to move forward with an attempt to secure an indictment from a grand jury. But it couldn’t even do that because the government seemingly isn’t interested in actually proving its case in court — not even in front of a court that only needs to see probable cause, rather than the much higher “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard used by criminal courts.

Reid was charged with an enhanced felony assault charge, supposedly due to her “infliction of bodily injury” on the FBI agent who hurt themself while “assisting” ICE in arresting a person who began her interaction by doing nothing more harmful than simply filming them with her phone.

The DOJ has tried to indict Reid twice for this supposed “assault.” It has now failed twice, as WUSA9 reports.

Federal prosecutors twice sought a grand jury indictment against a D.C. woman accused of assaulting an FBI agent during an ICE inmate transfer — and were twice rejected, the U.S. Attorney’s Office admitted in court Thursday.

Magistrate Judge G. Michael Harvey revealed the denials to attorneys for Sydney Lori Reid and later granted their request to remove all bond conditions and release her on her own recognizance over prosecutors’ objections.

I’m sure someone will try to pretend these are the actions of an “activist” judge who shouldn’t be allowed to handle cases brought by this particular administration.

But the details show it’s the government that’s mostly inert, apparently assuming all it has to do is show up in front of a grand jury to obtain an indictment. Almost zero effort was made here, which makes the double-denial completely understandable:

Federal prosecutors declined to call the injured FBI agent or any of the ICE officers involved in the incident during Thursday’s hearing, however. Instead, they had an investigator with the U.S. Attorney’s Office testify about his review of video of the incident and brief conversations with the officers. The investigator, Special Agent Sean Ricardi, said he’d had no involvement in the case until he was asked to prepare for testimony Thursday morning.

When the government says “it’s our word against yours,” that’s generally enough to make people understand they’re already going up against a stacked deck. When the government fails (repeatedly, in recent weeks) to secure indictments even when it’s their word against no one’s, it’s clear the government actually has no case to present.

It would be nice to see a revised percentage from the DHS that only utilizes sustained assault allegations that result in an indictment or conviction. But we’ll never see that sort of honesty from this administration, which relies almost solely on misrepresentations of goddamn everything to push its narratives forward. There’s a war on Americans going on here, led by a super-charged ICE. But all the most powerful people can do is play the victim while trying to bully reality into better alignment with its bullshit narratives.

Another Bullshit ‘Assaulting An ICE Officer’ Case Falls Apart In Front Of A Grand Jury
The number of assaults on ICE officers was always going to increase. There’s no way it wouldn’t, not when ICE was sending out a task force composed of multiple federal law enforcement a…
Another Bullshit ‘Assaulting An ICE Officer’ Case Falls Apart In Front Of A Grand Jury

Daily Beast: Vance, Hegseth and Miller Branded ‘Nazis’ in Botched PR Stunt

Posted on by
Reply

Protesters heckled Trump’s top officials as they visited historic Union Station.

Vice President J.D. Vance, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, and White House Deputy Chief of StaffStephen Miller were met with a hostile welcome at Washington, D.C.’s Union Station on Wednesday.

Their visit came as the National Guard had been camped out around the iconic station as part of President Donald Trump’s crime crackdown in the nation’s capital.

Bystanders looked on as the trio was met with hecklers in the station’s marble lobby as they came confidently strolling through with their entourage.

“You’re an embarrassment to Ohio,” one woman could be heard shouting as Vance kept a smile plastered on his face.

“F***ing nazi,” another man wearing a backpack shouted while taking video on his phone as the group marched through.

“Get the f*** out of my city,” shouted a third man.

Others could be heard chanting “free DC” as video showed the group casually walking into Union Station’s Shake Shack restaurant.

Other protesters shouted about the war in Gaza and to “free Palestine.”

In another video taken of their entrance, a man could be heard shouting at Vance, “Oh look, it’s couch f—er. You going to f— a couch, buddy?” in a reference to the joke that plagued the vice president on the campaign trail.

Upon entering the restaurant, Vance mingled with some service members, many of whom said they were from South Carolina. He took a few pictures while thanking them for their service and joked that the visit was “a hell of a lot more fun” than what he did most days.

“We ought to be able to enjoy great American cities. That’s what we’re trying to do in the Trump administration,” Vance told reporters from inside the Shake Shack as protesters could still be heard in the background.

As they spoke, a box of burgers sat in front of them, and National Guard members surrounded them. Chants of “Free DC” could still be heard in the background.

“We’re committed to this mission just like the one at the southern border and in Los Angeles,” Hegseth said. “Our law enforcement officers deserve to be able to do their jobs safely.”

The defense secretary gestured to the box of cheeseburgers in front of him and declared he “always liked a good cheeseburger” when he was in uniform, so he was hopeful he could deliver a few of them.

The Trump administration announced earlier this month that it was deploying hundreds of National Guard troops to the nation’s capital to combat crime. Multiple Republican-led states, including West Virginia, South Carolina, Ohio, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Tennessee, have all rushed to send additional troops to D.C.

However, critics have observed that the service members have largely been stationed along the National Mall and at Union Station, two largely low-crime destinations visited by millions of tourists every year.

In an unhinged rant, Miller then said they were going to “add thousands more resources to this city to get the criminals and the gang members out of here.”

He argued they were going to ignore the “stupid white hippies” protesting, who he claimed should go home and “take a nap because they’re all over 90 years old,” despite the hecklers at Union Station appearing to be all different ages.

“It’s kind of bizarre that we have a bunch of old, primarily white people, who are out there protesting the policies that keep people safe when they never felt danger in their entire lives,” Vance angrily added.

Recapping his field trip on Fox News later that night, the vice president deflected on host Laura Ingraham’s description of the appearance as “eventful,” claiming instead he had heard from “a couple of friends” who said the area now “feels safer.”

“Living with lawlessness and disorder,” he added, “is fundamentally a question of political will.”

“If you’ve got the political will to enforce the law, you can make even cities like D.C. safe again, and that’s what we are demonstrating. And I hope that the American people take an important lesson from this because, obviously, D.C. is a federal city. New York, L.A., these places are not,” he said.

“I hope the American people just recognize that you don’t have to live with lawlessness. You don’t have to live with third-world murder rates. If you just take control of these cities, you can make them save places to live again.”

Vance, Hegseth and Miller Branded ‘Nazis’ in Botched PR Stunt
Protesters heckled Trump’s top officials as they visited historic Union Station.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/vance-hegseth-and-miller-branded-nazis-in-botched-pr-stunt

Inquisitr: ICE Arrests Plummet in Embarrassing Setback for Stephen Miller

Posted on by
Reply

Despite pressure from White House policy strategist Stephen Miller to escalate migrant detentions, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) recorded a 19 percent drop in daily arrests from June to July. This surprising downturn shows the limits of their aggressive immigration tactics.

According to the nonpartisan Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC), ICE booked an average of 990 arrests per day between July 1 and July 27. That’s down markedly from 1,224 arrests per day during June, representing a nearly 20 percent decline in a single month.

These figures bring into stark relief the discrepancy between on-the-ground performance and Miller’s high-pressure expectations. The former White House deputy chief of staff has relentlessly pushed for 3,000 arrests per day, an unprecedented rate intended to realize former President Trump’s plans for the largest mass deportation effort in U.S. history. Instead, ICE is operating at roughly one-third the pace Miller demanded.

Miller, widely viewed as the architect behind many of Trump’s toughest immigration policies, allegedly threatened to fire ICE field office leaders whose offices ranked in the bottom 10 percent for arrest activity. Such aggressive oversight and internal pressure were intended to turbocharge enforcement, but the data shows the policy has not translated into scaled results.

The TRAC data signals potentially growing internal friction within ICE. Enforcement resources, legal constraints, staffing levels, and logistical complexities appear to be undermining Miller’s push for rapid, large-scale migrant arrests.

Whether administrative resistance, legal challenges, or operational capacity is at fault remains unclear, but the numbers do. A drop from 1,224 to 990 arrests per day means ICE detained roughly 7,758 fewer people in July than would have been expected under June’s pace, despite White House demands to ramp up enforcement.

Critics say the gap between Miller’s strategy and ICE’s actual output underscores a deeper disconnect within the immigration apparatus, between political directives from the top and the reality of enforcement on the ground. They argue this is a cautionary tale about over-reliance on high-intensity quotas that neglect operational feasibility and legal safeguards.

Supporters of Miller’s agenda argue that even the 990-per-day arrest rate in July signals a robust, no-exception enforcement posture, and the decline may reflect fewer available targets or improved border deterrence.

Still, the shortfall is stark. If ICE had met the 3,000-per-day benchmark for July, it would have booked around 90,000 arrests in the month. Instead, at its current pace, it would come in closer to 28,000 arrests total, missing the goal by a factor of more than three.

Even more, the drop comes at a critical time. As summer progresses and border crossings and migration patterns shift, policy advocates emphasize that maintaining, or increasing, enforcement momentum is crucial to sustaining broader deterrence goals.

From a political standpoint, the trend presents a public relations challenge for Miller. Suppose enforcement agencies cannot deliver on his demands. In that case, critics may question the realism of his approach to immigration control and the decision to push staff with threats instead of sustainable support.

Looking ahead, ICE may attempt to recalibrate, temporarily increasing internal operations or focusing on more enforceable cases. But any future uptick will face scrutiny: Is the agency capable of scaling to match Miller’s specified targets, or was the strategy always out of sync with practical limitations?

In sum, the nearly 20 percent drop in ICE arrests from June to July marks a humbling moment for immigration hardliners. Despite intense pressure from Miller to meet ambitious quotas, the agency’s output fell sharply and well below the aggressive benchmarks laid out by the former deputy chief of staff.

Inquisitr: ICE Arrests Plummet in Embarrassing Setback for Stephen Miller