HuffPost: Federal Agents Retreat From Immigration Raid In Upstate New York Amid Protests: ‘Gestapo’

The operation took one man into custody, according to local outlet WXXI.

Federal agents pulled back from a raid on rooftop workers at a rental site in upstate New York on Tuesday morning, as protesters crowded the street outside the location and forcefully condemned their operation.

About 100 demonstrators joined the scene in Rochester, yelling “shame” and “Gestapo,” as immigration enforcement agents, some of which were masked, tried to arrest people working at the site, eventually forcing them to retreat, according to WXXI. The protesters clapped and made obscene gestures as the agents left, the local outlet said.

One vehicle belonging to U.S. Customs and Border Protection was left with four flat tires. It’s unclear how the tires were slashed. Protesters cheered as that SUV was driven away.

Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, a senior fellow at the American Immigration Council, acknowledged that slashing the tires of a federal agent’s vehicle could amount to serious wrongdoing.

“Which is why it’s pretty incredible that we are seeing that level of willingness to engage in pretty serious behavior in opposition to immigration enforcement,” Reichlin-Melnick wrote on X, formerly Twitter.

One of the people who was doing work on the roof was taken into custody as a result of Tuesday’s operation, WXXI said. Roofing contractor Clayton Baker identified the man as one of his workers, noting that he had legal documentation, and decried his arrest as “inhumane.”

“He’s a family guy, and he’s got a baby on the way. He’s never even had a speeding ticket that I know of. He goes to church every Sunday, and he pays his taxes,” Baker told WXXI.

The agents did not manage to detain any of the other workers, who remained on the roof throughout the operation.

A CBP spokesperson said Tuesday’s raid was a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement operation. ICE did not immediately return HuffPost’s request for comment.

Ruth Reeves, one of the people who joined the protest, told WHAM why she felt compelled to show up.

“They’re here putting on a roof, trying to make a dollar and paying taxes on that dollar, and ICE was here bothering them, so I came to bother ICE,” Reeves told the outlet.

As the White House has intensified its immigration crackdown across the country, the Trump administration earlier this year sued Rochester over its “sanctuary city” policies. The city council has since voted to reaffirm that policy.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/federal-agents-retreat-immigration-raid_n_68c1486de4b0f2df4e0512d5

Associated Press: She was adopted into an abusive home in the US. Decades later, ICE deported her back to Brazil

In March, Pires showed up at the immigration office with paperwork listing all her check-ins over the past eight years. This time, instead of receiving another compliance report, she was immediately handcuffed and detained.

“The government failed her,” attorney Jim Merklinger said. “They allowed this to happen.”

It sounded like freedom, like a world of possibility beyond the orphanage walls.

Maria Pires was getting adopted. At 11 years old, she saw herself escaping the chaos and violence of the Sao Paulo orphanage, where she’d been sexually assaulted by a staff member. She saw herself leaving Brazil for America, trading abandonment for belonging.

A single man in his 40s, Floyd Sykes III, came to Sao Paulo to meet her. He signed some paperwork and brought Maria home.

She arrived in the suburbs of Baltimore in the summer of 1989, a little girl with a tousle of dark hair, a nervous smile and barely a dozen words of English. The sprawling subdivision looked idyllic, with rows of modest brick townhouses and a yard where she could play soccer.

She was, she believed, officially an American.

But what happened in that house would come to haunt her, marking the start of a long descent into violence, crime and mental illness.

“My father — my adopted father — he was supposed to save me,” Pires said. Instead, he tortured and sexually abused her.

After nearly three years of abuse, Sykes was arrested. The state placed Pires in foster care.

By then, she was consumed with fury. In the worst years, she beat a teenager at a roller rink, leaving him in a coma. She attacked a prison guard and stabbed her cellmate with a sharpened toothbrush.

In prison, she discovered that no one had ever bothered to complete her immigration paperwork. Not Sykes. Not Maryland social service agencies.

That oversight would leave her without a country. She wasn’t American, it turned out, and she’d lost her Brazilian citizenship when she was adopted by Sykes, who died several years ago. But immigration officials, including those under President Donald Trump’s first administration, let her stay in the country.

After her release from prison in 2017, Pires stayed out of trouble and sought help to control her anger. She checked in once a year with Immigration and Customs Enforcement and paid for an annual work permit.

But in the second Trump administration — with its promise of mass deportations, a slew of executive orders and a crackdown targeting those the president deemed “the worst of the worst” — everything changed. Trump’s unyielding approach to immigration enforcement has swept up tens of thousands of immigrants, including many like Pires who came to the U.S. as children and know little, if any, life outside America. They have been apprehended during ICE raids, on college campuses, or elsewhere in their communities, and their detentions often draw the loudest backlash.

In Pires’ case, she was detained during a routine check-in, sent to one immigration jail after another, and ultimately deported to a land she barely remembers. The Associated Press conducted hours of interviews with Pires and people who know her and reviewed Maryland court records, internal ICE communications, and adoption and immigration paperwork to tell her story.

U.S. immigration officials say Pires is a dangerous serial criminal who’s no longer welcome in the country. Her case, they say, is cut and dried.

Pires, now 47, doesn’t deny her criminal past.

But little about her story is straightforward.

A new chapter of childhood, marked by abuse

Pires has no clear memories from before she entered the orphanage. All she knows is that her mother spent time in a mental institution.

The organization that facilitated her adoption was later investigated by Brazilian authorities over allegations it charged exorbitant fees and used videos to market available children, according to a Sao Paulo newspaper. Organization leaders denied wrongdoing.

Pires remembers a crew filming a TV commercial. She believes that’s how Sykes found her.

In his custody, the abuse escalated over time. When Sykes went to work, he sometimes left her locked in a room, chained to a radiator with only a bucket as a toilet. He gave her beer and overpowered her when she fought back. She started cutting herself.

Sykes ordered her to keep quiet, but she spoke almost no English then anyway. On one occasion, he forced a battery into her ear as punishment, causing permanent hearing loss.

In September 1992, someone alerted authorities. Sykes was arrested. Child welfare officials took custody of Maria, then 14.

Maryland Department of Human Services spokesperson Lilly Price said the agency couldn’t comment on specific cases because of confidentiality laws but noted in a statement that adoptive parents are responsible for applying for U.S. citizenship for children adopted from other countries.

Court documents show Sykes admitted sexually assaulting Maria multiple times but he claimed the assaults stopped in June 1990.

He was later convicted of child abuse. Though he had no prior criminal record, court officials acknowledged a history of similar behavior, records show.

Between credit for time served and a suspended prison sentence, Sykes spent about two months in jail.

Sykes’ younger sister Leslie Parrish said she’s often wondered what happened to Maria.

“He ruined her life,” she said, weeping. “There’s a special place in hell for people like that.”

Parrish said she wanted to believe her brother had good intentions; he seemed committed to becoming a father and joined a social group for adoptive parents of foreign kids. She even accompanied him to Brazil.

But in hindsight, she sees it differently. She believes sinister motives lurked “in the back of his sick mind.”

At family gatherings, Maria didn’t show obvious signs of distress, though the language barrier made communication difficult. Other behavior was explained away as the result of her troubled childhood in the orphanage, Parrish said.

“But behind closed doors, I don’t know what happened.”

Years in prison and an eventual release

Pires’ teenage years were hard. She drank too much and got kicked out of school for fighting. She ran away from foster homes, including places where people cared for her deeply.

“If ever there was a child who was cheated out of life, it was Maria,” one foster mother wrote in later court filings. “She is a beautiful person, but she has had a hard life for someone so young.”

She struggled to provide for herself, sometimes ending up homeless. “My trauma was real bad,” she said. “I was on my own.”

At 18, she pleaded guilty to aggravated assault for the roller rink attack. She served two years in prison, where she finally learned basic reading and writing skills. It was then that authorities — and Pires herself — discovered she wasn’t a U.S. citizen.

Her criminal record meant it would be extremely difficult to gain citizenship. Suddenly, she faced deportation.

Pires said she hadn’t realized the potential consequences when accepting her plea deal.

“If l had any idea that I could be deported because of this, I would not have agreed to it,” she wrote, according to court records. “Going to jail was one thing, but I will lose everything if I am deported back to Brazil.”

A team of volunteer lawyers and advocates argued she shouldn’t be punished for something beyond her control.

“Maria has absolutely no one and nothing in Brazil. She would be completely lost there,” an attorney wrote in a 1999 letter to immigration officials.

Ultimately, the American judicial system agreed: Pires would be allowed to remain in the United States if she checked in annually with ICE, a fairly common process until Trump’s second term.

“How’s your mental?”

Pires didn’t immediately take advantage of her second chance.

She was arrested for cocaine distribution in 2004 and for check fraud in 2007. While incarcerated, she picked up charges for stabbing her cellmate in the eye, burning an inmate with a flat iron and throwing hot water on a correctional officer. Her sentence was extended.

Pires said she spent several years in solitary confinement, exacerbating her mental health challenges.

Her release in 2017 marked a new beginning. Through therapy and other support services, she learned to manage her anger and stay out of trouble. She gave up drinking. She started working long days in construction. She checked in every year with immigration agents.

But in 2023, work dried up and she fell behind on rent. She felt her mental health slipping. She applied for a women’s transitional housing program in Baltimore.

Pires thrived there. With no high school diploma and only second-grade reading skills, she qualified for a state-run job training course to polish and refinish floors. Photos show her smiling broadly in a blue graduation gown.

Friends say Pires may have a tough exterior, but she’s known for thinking of others first. She often greets people with a cheerful question: “How’s your mental?” It’s her way of acknowledging that everyone carries some sort of burden.

“This is a person who just yearns for family,” said Britney Jones, Pires’ former roommate. “She handles things with so much forgiveness and grace.”

The two were living together when Pires went to downtown Baltimore on March 6 for her annual immigration check-in. She never returned.

A crackdown on “the worst of the worst”

When President Donald Trump campaigned for a second term, he doubled down on promises to carry out mass deportations. Within hours of taking office, he signed a series of executive orders, targeting what he called “the worst of the worst” — murderers, rapists, gang members. The goal, officials have said, is 1 million deportations a year.

In March, Pires showed up at the immigration office with paperwork listing all her check-ins over the past eight years. This time, instead of receiving another compliance report, she was immediately handcuffed and detained.

“The government failed her,” attorney Jim Merklinger said. “They allowed this to happen.”

Given that she was adopted into the country as a child, she shouldn’t be punished for something that was out of her hands from the start, he said.

Her March arrest sparked a journey across America’s immigration detention system. From Baltimore, she was sent to New Jersey and Louisiana before landing at Eloy Detention Center in Arizona.

She tried to stay positive. Although Trump’s anti-immigrant rhetoric made her nervous, Pires reminded herself that the system granted her leniency in the past. She told her friends back home not to worry.

A deportation priority

On June 2, in an email exchange obtained by AP, an ICE agent asked to have Pires prioritized for a deportation flight to Brazil leaving in four days.

“I would like to keep her as low profile as possible,” the agent wrote.

Her lawyer tried to stop the deportation, calling Maryland politicians, ICE officials and Brazilian diplomats.

“This is a woman who followed all the rules,” Merklinger said. “This should not be happening.”

He received terrified calls from Pires, who was suddenly transferred to a detention facility near Alexandria, Louisiana, a common waypoint for deportation flights.

Finally, Pires said, she was handcuffed, shackled, put on a bus with dozens of other detainees, driven to the Alexandria airport and loaded onto an airplane. There was a large group of Brazilians on the flight, which was a relief, though she spoke hardly any Portuguese after so many years in the U.S.

“I was just praying to God,” she said. “Maybe this is his plan.”

After two stops to drop off other deportees, they arrived in the Brazilian port city of Fortaleza.

Starting from scratch back in Brazil

Brazilian authorities later took Pires to a women’s shelter in an inland city in the eastern part of the country.

She has spent months there trying to get Brazilian identification documents. She began relearning Portuguese — listening to conversations around her and watching TV.

Most of her belongings are in a Baltimore storage unit, including DJ equipment and a tripod she used for recording videos — two of her passions.

In Brazil, she has almost nothing. She depends on the shelter for necessities such as soap and toothpaste. But she maintains a degree of hope.

“I’ve survived all these years,” Pires said. “I can survive again.”

She can’t stop thinking about her birth family. Years ago, she got a tattoo of her mother’s middle name. Now more than ever, she wants to know where she came from. “I still have that hole in my heart,” she said.

Above all, she hopes to return to America. Her attorney recently filed an application for citizenship. But federal officials say that’s not happening.

“She was an enforcement priority because of her serial criminal record,” Department of Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said in an email. “Criminals are not welcome in the U.S.”

Every morning, Pires wakes up and keeps trying to build a new life. She’s applied for Brazilian work authorization, but getting a job will probably be difficult until her Portuguese improves. She’s been researching language classes and using her limited vocabulary to communicate with other shelter residents.

In moments of optimism, she imagines herself working as a translator, earning a decent salary and renting a nice apartment.

She wonders if God’s plan will ever become clear.

https://apnews.com/article/trump-immigration-policy-deportations-brazil-bb8beabbe4deb8f966826b9161158a3b

Raw Story: ‘He’s a nut’: Republicans turn on Trump attack dog who got ‘too big for his britches’

Republican lawmakers are reportedly fed up with housing official Bill Pulte and view him as “a nut,” Politico reports.

The Trump administration’s Federal Housing Finance Agency director is now at the center of President Donald Trump’s heated campaign against the Federal Reserve and has become “one of his most vociferous social media attack dogs” for the commander-in-chief.

Last week, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent confronted Pulte, threatening physical violence during an exclusive Georgetown event for Trump administration officials.

During the cocktail hour, Bessent launched into an aggressive confrontation with Pulte, claiming the housing official had been speaking negatively about him to Trump. Witnesses reported Bessent’s explosive verbal assault, with him demanding, “Why the f— are you talking to the president about me? F— you,” and declaring, “I’m gonna punch you in your f—ing face.”

Republicans are reportedly pleased that Bessent confronted Pulte.

Speaking anonymously to Politico due to the sensitive nature of the administration infighting, one lawmaker shared frustration over Pulte.

“I think he’s a nut,” one House Republican told Politico.

“The guy’s just a little too big for his britches,” said another GOP lawmaker and member of the House Financial Services Committee. “I’ve got great respect for Bessent for taking him on.”

Pulte initiated mortgage fraud allegations against Fed Governor Lisa Cook — Trump later moved to fire her. Like Trump, Pulte also attacks Fed Chair Jerome Powell, claiming his handling of monetary policy and the expensive renovations to the central bank’s Washington headquarters.

“Rank-and-file Hill Republicans” appear to back Bessent and see him as “a key stabilizing force on economic policy within the Trump administration.”

Many Republicans see Bessent as “the adult in the room.”

Rep. Dan Meuser (R-PA), chair of the House Financial Services oversight subcommittee, prefers Bessent’s approach.

“I’m always in line with where the president wants to go, and I believe [Pulte] is as well,” he said. “I know Secretary Bessent is, and that’s where my loyalties lie, with the president and with Secretary Bessent.”

“I would have done the same,” another Republican who spoke anonymously to Politico said.

https://www.rawstory.com/trump-2673976667

Daily Beast: Trump Hit With Fresh Court Blow After Revenge Firing

The Federal Reserve governor’s job is safe for now.

Donald Trump was hit with a legal smackdown after trying to remove Federal Reserve governor Lisa Cook.

Cook can stay in her job, a federal judge ruled in Washington, D.C., blocking Trump’s unprecedented attempt to boot her using allegations of mortgage fraud.

She will now be present at the Fed’s Sept. 16 meeting, but Cook’s trouble with Trump is not yet over.

“President Trump has not identified anything related to Cook’s conduct or job performance as a board member that would indicate that she is harming the board or the public interest by executing her duties unfaithfully or ineffectively,” U.S. District Judge Jia Cobb said after issuing a preliminary injunction.

The judge also ruled that removing Cook caused her “irreparable harm” and that the president had likely violated her procedural right to due process by posting his letter to her on social media.

The Daily Beast has contacted the White House and the Federal Reserve for comment.

Trump posted a public termination letter on his Truth Social account last month, addressed to Cook, who was confirmed by the Senate in 2022 as the first Black woman to serve as a Federal Reserve governor.

His post contained allegations that Cook had committed mortgage fraud, claims that predated her time on the board, and said she was being removed from her position “effective immediately.”

At the time, Cook released her own statement, claiming Trump had “no authority” to fire her. She added, “I will not resign. I will continue to carry out my duties to help the American economy as I have been doing since 2022.”

Cook hired lawyer Abbe Lowell, who said in a statement last month that Trump’s “demands lack any proper process, basis or legal authority” and they would take whatever actions were necessary to prevent “his attempted illegal action.”

Governors can only be removed by a president with a valid reason for termination, known as “for cause.” Otherwise, they serve in long, fixed roles to add to financial stability. Cook, who was nominated to the post by Joe Biden, is not due to finish her current term until 2038.

The preliminary injunction Judge Cobb granted on Tuesday also found that Trump had likely violated the Federal Reserve Act by using social media to air his allegations about her mortgage fraud and also to fire her in public.

“The court is highly doubtful that Cook should have been required to piece together the evidentiary basis for a ‘for cause’ removal from a scattered assortment of social media posts and news articles,” Cobb wrote. “Even if the notice provided had been sufficient, Cook’s due process rights were nevertheless likely violated because she was not given a ‘meaningful opportunity’ to be heard.”

Cobb also barred Reserve Chair Jerome Powell or Fed officials from carrying out Trump’s wishes of firing Cook.

“This ruling recognizes and reaffirms the importance of safeguarding the independence of the Federal Reserve from illegal political interference,” Cook’s counsel Lowell said in a statement.

“Allowing the president to unlawfully remove Governor Cook on unsubstantiated and vague allegations would endanger the stability of our financial system and undermine the rule of law.”

He added, “Governor Cook will continue to carry out her sworn duties as a Senate-confirmed Board Governor.”

Trump did not answer a reporter’s question about a court overruling his firing when he was leaving a seafood dinner on Tuesday.

However, White House deputy press secretary Kush Desai told Politico that Trump’s firing of Cook was “lawful” and boosted accountability for the body that sets interest rates.

“The president determined there was cause to remove a governor who was credibly accused of lying in financial documents from a highly sensitive position overseeing financial institutions,” Desai said.

“The removal of a governor for cause improves the Federal Reserve board’s accountability and credibility for both the markets and American people.”

Judge Cobb’s ruling said this was the first purported “for cause” removal of a governor in the 111-year history of the Federal Reserve.

In her finding, Cobb said Trump’s attempt to remove Cook “was done in violation” of the “for cause” provision.

She said the best reading of that provision was that it was limited to “actions relating to that governor’s ‘behavior in office.’” And because the allegations of mortgage fraud occurred before Cook’s role as governor, Cobb said that “for cause” did “not contemplate removing an individual purely for conduct that occurred before they began in office.”

Trump has also attempted to fire Powell this year, unhappy with his refusal to cut interest rates.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-hit-with-fresh-court-blow-after-revenge-firing

Fox News: ICE retreats from job site in upstate New York after being confronted by over 100 protesters [Video]

Workers stayed on a roof in Rochester as agents left with slashed tires following a four-hour ICE standoff. 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/ice-retreats-from-job-site-in-upstate-new-york-after-being-confronted-by-over-100-protesters/vi-AA1MenZO

Fox News: Federal agents forced to retreat on slashed tires after immigration raid confrontation in sanctuary city

More than 100 demonstrators surround ICE vehicles as roofers refuse to come down from rooftop

A dramatic standoff in upstate New York between immigration agents, roofers and protesters ended with officials leaving the scene with slashed tires Tuesday.

The confrontation happened at a residential job site where one worker was detained and others refused to come down from a rooftop in Rochester’s Park Avenue area.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents, Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and other federal agencies arrived at the sanctuary city home to carry out a removal operation of the suspected illegal immigrants. 

One roofer was taken into custody, while others stayed on the rooftop, WXXI News reported.

The incident escalated quickly when more than 100 protesters gathered at the scene, according to the NPR radio station. 

Some were heard chanting “shame” and called the agents “gestapo,” according to the outlet.

At one point, a CBP vehicle, the station reported, was allegedly forced to retreat on four slashed tires as the crowd clapped. A few blocks away from the scene, the SUV was towed, WHAM reported.

The four-hour standoff saw federal agents abandon their attempts to detain other workers.

Late last month, the Rochester City Council voted unanimously to codify the city’s sanctuary policy.

The Western New York Coalition of Farmworker Serving Agencies helped mediate the standoff, according to WXXI.

“The coalition is committed to standing alongside farmworkers, immigrants, and migrants to ensure dignity, fairness, and access to justice,” coalition Executive Director Irene Sanchez said in a news release.

The incident came as the Trump administration has increased immigration enforcement across the country.

“President Trump’s been clear we’re going to prioritize public safety threats and national security threats, and data shows that’s exactly what we’re doing,” White House border czar Tom Homan told reporters Tuesday. “But if you want me to sit here and bless someone being here illegally, I’m not going to do that because they cheated the system.”

CBP and ICE did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital’s request for comment.

Awesome crowd! Keep it up!

https://www.foxnews.com/us/federal-agents-forced-retreat-slashed-tires-immigration-raid-confrontation-sanctuary-city

Associated Press: Judge pauses California’s request to bar Trump administration’s ongoing use of National Guard troops

A federal judge who ruled last week that the Trump administration broke federal law by sending National Guard troops to the Los Angeles area said Tuesday he will not immediately consider a request to bar the ongoing use of 300 Guard troops.

In a court order, Senior District Judge Charles Breyer in San Francisco said he was not sure he had the authority to consider California’s motion for a preliminary injunction blocking the administration’s further deployment of state National Guard troops. That’s because the case is on appeal before the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, the judge said.

Breyer indefinitely paused all proceedings related to the state’s motion, though he suggested California officials could file the request with the 9th Circuit.

An email to the California attorney general’s office late Tuesday was not immediately returned.

Breyer’s Sept. 2 ruling took on heightened importance amid President Donald Trump’s talk of National Guard deployments to other Democratic-led cities like Chicago, Baltimore and New York. Trump has already deployed the Guard as part of his unprecedented law enforcement takeover targeting crime, immigration and homelessness in Washington, where he has direct legal control over the District of Columbia National Guard.

The Trump administration sent troops to the Los Angeles area in early June after days of protests over immigration raids.

Breyer ruled the administration “willfully” broke federal law, saying the government knew “they were ordering troops to execute domestic law beyond their usual authority” while using “armed soldiers ( whose identity was often obscured by protective armor) and military vehicles to set up protective perimeters and traffic blockades, engage in crowd control, and otherwise demonstrate a military presence in and around Los Angeles.”

He did not require the 300 remaining soldiers to leave but pointed out that they received improper training and ordered the administration to stop using them “to execute the laws.” The order that applies only to California was supposed to take effect Sept. 12, but the 9th Circuit has put it on hold for now.

California later sought a preliminary injunction blocking an Aug. 5 order from the administration extending the deployment of the 300 troops for another 90 days.

The further deployment “would ensure that California’s residents will remain under a form of military occupation until early November,” including while voting on Nov. 4 on whether to adopt new congressional maps — “an election with national attention and significance,” state officials said in a court filing.

https://apnews.com/article/trump-california-national-guard-troops-08f8a71ca5834b8f32ce4c3ee944abca

Washington Post: National Guard documents reveal candor, ‘shame’ over D.C. deployment

The National Guard, in measuring public sentiment about President Donald Trump’s federal takeover of Washington, D.C., has assessed that its mission is perceived as “leveraging fear,” driving a “wedge between citizens and the military,” and promoting a sense of “shame” among some troops and veterans, according to internal documents reviewed by The Washington Post.

The assessments, which have not been previously reported, underscore how domestic mobilizations that are rooted in politics risk damaging Americans’ confidence in the men and women who serve their communities in times of crisis. The documents reveal, too, with a rare candor in some cases, that military officials have been kept apprised that their mission is viewed by a segment of society as wasteful, counterproductive and a threat to long-standing precedent stipulating that U.S. soldiers — with rare exception — are to be kept out of domestic law enforcement matters.

Trump has said the activation of more than 2,300 National Guard troops was necessary to reduce crime in the nation’s capital, though data maintained by the D.C. police indicates an appreciable decline was underway long before his August declaration of an “emergency.” In the weeks since, the Guard has spotlighted troops’ work assisting the police and “beautifying” the city by laying mulch and picking up trash, part of a daily disclosure to the news media generated by Joint Task Force D.C., the military command overseeing the deployment.

Not for public consumption, however, is an internal “media roll up” that analyzes the tone of news stories and social media posts about the National Guard’s presence and activities in Washington. Government media relations personnel routinely produce such assessments and provide summaries to senior leaders for their awareness. They stop short of drawing conclusions about the sentiments being raised.

“Trending videos show residents reacting with alarm and indignation,” a summary from Friday said. “One segment features a local [resident] describing the Guard’s presence as leveraging fear, not security — highlighting widespread discomfort with what many perceive as a show of force.”

A National Guard official acknowledged the documents are authentic but downplayed their sensitivity, saying the assessments are intended for internal use and were inadvertently emailed to The Post last week. The official spoke on the condition of anonymity, citing an unspecified policy. It is unclear how many people mistakenly received the documents.

Spokespeople for the Army, which is overseeing the deployment, did not provide comment.

Social media posts about the military mission in D.C. summarized on Friday were assessed to be 53 percent negative, 45 percent neutral and 2 percent positive, the documents say.

While officials have insisted that troops are not policing, their actions have sometimes blurred the lines between soldiering and law enforcement, including detaining criminal suspects until police have arrived. One soldier has been credited with helping the apparent victim of a drug overdose by giving them Narcan, officials have noted.

For most Washington residents and tourists, though, the troops often are most visible at Metro stops and federal monuments, looking bored and absorbing both praise and insults from passersby.

Friday’s assessment highlights “Mentions of Fatigue, confusion, and demoralization — ‘just gardening,’ unclear mission, wedge between citizens and the military.”

The National Guard was ordered to this mission and does not have a responsibility to make it palatable to the public, said Jason Dempsey, a former Army officer who studies civil military affairs for the Center for a New American Security. But, he said, military leaders should think about how deployments with political undertones could have implications for recruiting and sustaining the force.

The themes raised in these assessments, Dempsey said, also should give pause to American citizens. National Guard troops are overseen by governors, who almost always provide their approval when those forces are mobilized for federal service overseas or within the United States. But the mission in Washington, and an earlier deployment to Los Angeles, both occurred against the consent of civil authorities in those jurisdictions.

“When elected representatives say, ‘We do not want them,’ but the federal government sends them, and then you see these kinds of numbers,” he said, “it does raise existential questions for the health of the National Guard, for how America views its National Guard and how America uses the military writ large.”

Such concerns also were spelled out in a separate cache of internal documents that outlined another Trump administration initiative: the creation of a “quick reaction force” of National Guard troops to respond to civil unrest anywhere in the United States. In that case, first reported by The Post as Trump’s D.C. deployment got underway in mid-August, military officials voiced concern about “potential political sensitivities” and “legal considerations related to their role as a nonpartisan force.”

Trump has since signed an executive order directing formation of the quick reaction force.

In examining public opinions online, Guard officials last week highlighted the sentiments shared by people who self-identified as veterans and active-duty troops, who, the documents show, say they viewed the deployment “with shame and alarm.” The assessment also homed in on how people are reacting to various court cases challenging Trump’s domestic military deployments.

A federal judge last week ruled Trump’s mobilization of nearly 5,000 U.S. troops to Los Angeles in June was an illegal use of military force to conduct law enforcement. An appeals court later granted the Trump administration’s motion for a stay in the case until its argument could be heard in greater detail — allowing the military mission there to continue. About 300 National Guard troops remain in the area.

The D.C. deployment, which includes troops not only from the District but from eight Republican-led states as well, is the subject of a lawsuit by city officials who argue that Trump broke the law by putting Guard troops into law enforcement roles. The public reaction being monitored by military officials focuses on “debate about the legality of the mission, whether it’s needed and if it has been successful,” one assessment reads, noting that there is ongoing criticism of the mission as “federal overreach and politically motivated.”

Others viewed the ongoing lawsuit in Washington as “unreasonable,” the assessment shows.

The National Guard has sometimes struggled to highlight significant impact from their presence. The public summary from Tuesday, for instance, noted a sole example of troops providing undescribed support to police at Union Station when a person was “acting aggressively.” The person was ushered out the door, the Guard noted.

In another update, the Guard indicates troops “continue efforts to restore and beautify public spaces across the District” and have “cleared 906 bags of trash, spread 744 cubic yards of mulch, removed five truckloads of plant waste, cleared 3.2 miles of roadway, and painted 270 feet of fencing.”

Those statistics may be among the most consequential takeaways of Trump’s use of the military in D.C., Dempsey said, and should prompt scrutiny of whether this mission was ever necessary in the first place.

“That is such a suboptimal use of military training that we should all be asking, ‘Why are they here?’” Dempsey said. “If they’re picking up trash, they’re not here for a security emergency. There’s no clearer metric than that.”

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/national-guard-documents-reveal-candor-shame-over-d-c-deployment/ar-AA1MfR7D

Extra.ie: Trump’s ICE agents threaten to deport Irish grandmother living in the US for 47 years

An Irish woman who has been living in the US since she was a child faces deportation over a ‘bad’ $25 cheque she wrote a decade ago.

Donna Brown, 58, who emigrated nearly 50 years ago, is being held by Trump’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement – known as ICE – and faces being sent back to Ireland.

Her husband, Jim Brown, said his wife, an Irish citizen born in England, moved to America when she was 11 and is a legal resident alien, but not a U.S. citizen. The couple married eight years ago, which he believes should also protect her from being deported.

Mr Brown told his local TV station in Missouri: ‘It’s just not fair that you’re telling me I have to be a bachelor the rest of my life because of some stupid policy.’

In July, Donna was arrested at customs in Chicago on her return from Ireland after a family funeral. Her husband said: ‘You don’t arrest 58-year-old grandmothers. It’s just wrong. She hasn’t committed crimes.’

She has now spent more than 30 days in jail in Kentucky as the US government moves to deport her, which Mr Brown fears will happen.

‘It’s egregious that we have allowed a government to allow this to happen,’ he said.

‘It’s egregious that we have allowed a government to allow this to happen,’ he said.

Legal documents for her arrest say that ten years ago, Donna wrote a bad cheque for $25. However, she paid the money back and was given probation. But Mr Brown said the US government is now arguing that was a ‘crime of moral turpitude’.

US courts say a ‘crime of moral turpitude… refers generally to conduct that shocks the public conscience as being inherently base, vile or depraved, contrary to the rules of morality’. It has been used in the past against former IRA members who did not declare their crimes to immigration.

Mr Brown believes his wife’s arrest is a direct result of the Trump administration’s aggressive immigration policies.

‘I think it’s nonsense. I think it’s a blanket thing to catch everybody, to fill [jail] beds. They signed a stupid bill that is torturing innocent people, and that’s the problem,’ he said. He is now protesting at what he calls his wife’s ‘deplorable’ conditions in jail and is campaigning for her release.

‘She’s been in this country 47 years, is married, with five kids and five grandkids, and you’re telling me she’s a flight risk? I want somebody to have the guts and the fortitude to stand up and say, “You know what? This is wrong”,’ he said.

‘It’s crazy that this is happening. It’s just crazy that this is even allowed in this country. That’s the problem. It shouldn’t even be thought that this should be okay,’ he said.

Mr Brown, a veteran who served 20 years in the military, said he won’t stop fighting for his wife. ‘My wife is not a criminal,’ he said. He is now caring for their horses on their nine-acre farm near Troy, Missouri.

A GoFundMe for Donna states it was created to help prepare and support her husband’s ‘fight for justice and freedom of his wife, Donna Hughes-Brown, who was wrongly detained and incarcerated this past July.

‘The goal is to raise the resources necessary to cover the lawyers and court fees, and help Jim and Donna navigate these difficult, stressful and expensive times,’ the appeal reads.

‘Jim and Donna are both very strong supporters and helpers of our community. They are often involved with multiple volunteer organisations and projects. They both are hard-working, honest, and caring individuals. They are good servers of God; humble people who are always willing to help, and kind friends that share knowledge and wisdom with anyone in need.’

In May of this year, Cliona Ward was released from custody in the US where she had been arrested after she returned from visiting her dying father in Ireland.

The 54-year-old Dubliner lives in Santa Cruz, California, and was detained by ICE over minor convictions from almost 20 years ago, which were supposed to have been expunged from her record.

CNN: Trump claims he can do anything he wants with the military. Here’s what the law says

Having rebranded the Department of Defense as the Department of War, the president is going on offense with the US military.

Donald Trump has foisted National Guard troops on Washington, DC, and Los Angeles. Other cities are on edge, particularly after he posted an apparently artificially generated image of himself dressed up like Robert Duvall’s surfing cavalry commander in “Apocalypse Now,” a meme that seemed to suggest he was threatening war on the city of Chicago.

Trump later clarified that the US would not go to war on Chicago, but he’s clearly comfortable joking about it. And he’s of the opinion his authority over the military is absolute.

“Not that I don’t have the right to do anything I want to do. I’m the president of the United States,” he said at a Cabinet meeting in August, when he was asked about the prospect of Chicagoans engaging in nonviolent resistance against the US military.

He’s reorienting the US military to focus on drug traffickers as terrorists and told Congress to expect more military strikes after the US destroyed a boat in the Caribbean last week.

All of this projects the kind of strongman decisiveness Trump admires.

A lot of it might also be illegal.

A ‘violation of the Posse Comitatus Act’

US District Judge Charles Breyer ruled this month that Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth committed a “a serious violation of the Posse Comitatus Act” when they deployed federalized troops to Los Angeles over the objections of the state’s governor and mayor.

The Posse Comitatus Act was passed by Congress in 1878 as Southern states worked to oust federal troops and end Reconstruction. Questions over how and whether troops can be used to enforce laws goes back to the pre-Civil War period, when federal marshals sought help from citizens and militiamen in recovering fugitive slaves and putting down the protests of abolitionists, according to the Congressional Research Service.

It is not clear why Trump has not yet, as he has promised, called up the National Guard to patrol in Chicago, but he may be waiting for the Supreme Court, which has been extremely deferential to his claims of authority, to weigh in on a preliminary basis.

Trump has more authority to deploy the military inside Washington, DC, which the Constitution says Congress controls. But Congress has ceded some authority to locally elected officials in recent decades. DC’s Attorney General Brian Schwalb has sued the Trump administration over the deployment.

Testing the War Powers Act

Trump’s strike on a boat in the Caribbean is also on murky legal ground.

After Vietnam, Congress overrode Richard Nixon’s veto to pass another law, the War Powers Act of 1973, which requires presidents to notify Congress within 48 hours of a military strike. And Trump did do that, at least his third such notification since taking office in January. Trump also sent notifications to Congress about his strike against an Iranian nuclear facility and Houthi rebels who were attacking shipping routes.

The Reiss Center at New York University maintains a database of War Powers Act notifications going back to the 1970s.

Cartels as terrorist organizations

In the notification about the Caribbean strike, Trump’s administration argued that it has declared drug cartels are terrorist organizations and that he operated within his constitutional authority to protect the country when he ordered the strike.

Strikes against terrorists have been authorized under the catchall vote that authorized the use of military force against Islamic terrorists after the 9/11 terror attacks.

But Congress, which the Constitution puts in charge of declaring war, has not authorized the use of military force against Venezuelan drug cartels.

Lack of explanation from the White House

Over the weekend, CNN’s Katie Bo Lillis, Natasha Bertrand and Zachary Cohen reported that the Pentagon abruptly canceled classified briefings to key House and Senate committees with oversight of the military, which means lawmaker have been unable to get the legal justification for the strike.

Many Americans might celebrate the idea of a military strike to take out drug dealers, and the administration is clearly primed to lean on the idea that the cartels are terrorists.

Here’s a key quote from CNN’s report:

“The strike was the obvious result of designating them a terrorist organization,” said one person familiar with the Pentagon’s thinking. “If there was a boat full of al Qaeda fighters smuggling explosives towards the US, would anyone even ask this question?”

Few details

It’s not yet clear which military unit was responsible for the strike, what intelligence suggested there were drugs onboard, who was on the boat or what the boat was carrying.

“The attack on the smuggling vessel in the Caribbean was so extraordinary because there was no reported attempt to stop the boat or detain its crew,” wrote Brian Finucane, a former State Department legal advisor now at International Crisis Group for the website Just Security. “Instead, the use of lethal force was used in the first resort.”

Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the US could have interdicted the boat and made a legal case against those onboard, but it decided instead to blow up the boat. The notice to Congress makes clear the administration will continue with other strikes.

War crime? Vance doesn’t ‘give a sh*t’

“The decision to blow up the boat and kill everyone onboard when interdiction and detention was a clearly available option is manifestly illegal and immoral,” Oona Hathaway, a law professor and director of the Center for Global Legal Challenges at Yale Law School, told me in an email.

The view of the administration could be best summarized by Vice President JD Vance stating that using the military to go after cartels is “the highest and best use of our military.”

When a user on X replied that the extrajudicial killing of civilians without presenting evidence is, by definition, a war crime, Vance, himself a Yale-educated lawyer, said this:

“I don’t give a sh*t what you call it.”

That’s not an acceptable response even for some Republicans.

“Did he ever read To Kill a Mockingbird?” wrote Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky in his own post on X. “Did he ever wonder what might happen if the accused were immediately executed without trial or representation?? What a despicable and thoughtless sentiment it is to glorify killing someone without a trial.”

Congress has power it likely won’t use

Congress has the power to stop Trump’s campaign against boats in the Caribbean. The War Powers Act allows lawmakers in the House and Senate to demand the president seek approval before continuing a campaign longer than 60 days. But that seems unlikely to occur at the moment.

After the strike against Iran earlier this year, Paul was the only Republican senator to side with Democrats and demand Trump seek approval for any future Iran strikes.

During his first term, seven Republicans voted with Senate Democrats to hem in Trump’s ability to strike against Iran after he ordered the killing of Iranian commander Qasem Soleimani. But there were not enough votes to overcome Trump’s veto that year.

Trump’s authority to use military force without congressional approval of the Caribbean operation technically expires after 60 days after he reports on the use of force, although he can extend it by an additional 30 days, although he could also declare a new operation is underway.

The use of these kinds of tactics has likely been in the works for some time.

In February, Trump designated drug cartels, including Venezuela’s Tren de Aragua, as foreign terror organizations. In April, CNN reported the CIA was reviewing whether it had authority to use lethal force against drug cartels.

But the military strike against the alleged cartel boat happened as part of a broader campaign against Venezuela, including positioning US ships, aircraft and a submarine in the Caribbean, according to a CNN report.

Trump may have campaigned as a president who would end wars, but he’s governing like a president who is very comfortable using his military.

https://www.cnn.com/2025/09/10/politics/venezuela-trump-military-strike-war-powers-explainer