A police officer intervened when he saw a man - who later identified himself as a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent - point a gun at a driver in Santa Ana, California Sunday afternoon, officials said.
...
Police said the officer saw a man exit his car while pointing a gun at the female driver behind him.
...
According to police, the armed man identified himself as an ICE agent, provided credentials and told the Fullerton officer that the woman had been following and recording him.
"The Fullerton Police Officer informed the agent that he could not assist with someone following or recording him if no crime had occurred, and that local law enforcement (Santa Ana PD) was en route. The female left the area shortly after," police said.
That's not the only ICE goon to point a gun at people taking photos:
One of these days, one of these unprofessional, untrained armed nitwits will pull a gun on a cop and get ventilated for his trouble.
Trump and his lackies in Congress tripled ICE's budget. It needs to be shaved by 90%.
ICE, CBP and the rest of the goons at DHS have been trampling over the law. The law moves slowly, but it will come for them.
32 comments:
Some dude in an unmarked car points a gun, its a matter of time before
someone decides its a matter of self defense, and shoots. To what I
read an see its not if, but when.
What happens when that happens?
Where does it go from there?
Eck!
If a person shots someone because they pointed a gun at them and it turns out that the culprit is ICE then the twisting and turning, coverup and fake body cam footage (even if it was still in the box) will all show up as fast as they can turn it out.
Kind of like the fake Polish soldiers that allegedly attacked a German radio station in 1939. Or the rooftop shooter that put a scratch on Trump's ear, then got blown away and can't say anything now. Who says Trump and his lackeys can't learn.
The really sad part is that they are so bad that I actually agree with you.
Make no mistake, I want the illegals gone. But the ICE personnel are so terrible and their heavy handed and unprofessional tactics (reminiscent of the ATF boys in the 90's and '00s) lead me to be on your side.
And that should anger and frighten all of us.
Dan,
Likely the case but only if its random and infrequent. They are so inept it
will be pattern and when repeated it will be observed and independently recorded.
As some would say, then the crazy begins.
Eck!
You want illegals gone, there’s nobody left to harvest your food, B. Or do you want growers to pay Americans a living wage instead?
So instead you prefer illegal slave labor?
What about the illegals in the cities ? You think they pick crops?
You really need a better argument, that one is wearing pretty threadbare
I’m guessing Trump wants to use either prison labor or SNAP recipients, since he thinks they’re all shiftless ******s.
That the largest ethnic group of SNAP recipients are whites matters not to him.
Facts be facts, B. If you think that crops are almost exclusively picked by people here legally, that would go against what I see here in the San Joaquin Valley on a daily basis.
But don’t let facts get in the way of a good Trumpist narrative.
The point (that you so conveniently missed) is that you guys use the excuse of "Who is gonna pick our lettuce?" and "Who is gonna mow our lawns" and do it cheaply as an excuse to allow illegal invasion of our country.
Which means you think it is OK to import what is, essentially, slave labor to do those jobs so a farmer can make more money. Kinda inconsistent with the whole "Progressive" concept of "Living Wage" innit?
I don't care what the farmers have to do to get their crops picked (or not) I'd still rather have the illegals gone and let the farmers figure it out. They will find a way, or they will go out of business and someone else will figure it out.
Your system, cheap exploited labor, so we get cheap(er) food is essentially slavery. And I am against that too. But I see that you believe that underpaying the Brown People is acceptable. I find that sad, disgusting, and racist. But then again, at the end of it, while you like to accuse folks like me of it, that's what you are promulgating here.
"Your system"? You checking out of America, now? The farmers, factory owners and so on that use migrant labor, including child labor, are in the main, supporters of your guy. You can see it in half of the news articles, where the farmers, etc., are complaining that they voted for Trump because they believed his lies about only going after the criminals, not the migrants who work hard at piss-poor jobs.
Your party is the one who has been standing in the way of reforming things for well over a decade. Last year, an immigration reform bill was well on its way until your Orange Blowhard torpedoed it, because he wanted to run on a platform of "only I can fix this."
You own this shit, mister. Don't forget it.
Simple fix to all this mess: hold employers accountable for who they hire! If a business hires an illegal alien, punish them. Because not only is it illegal to be in this country without authorization, it's illegal to hire someone in the country illegally. No more plausible deniability for businesses using hiring services. Do your due dilligence!
My suspicion is that businesses like the cheap labor and politicians don't want to solve the problem because it ignites their bases.
Pete
Pete, those guys all vote, they make campaign contributions, and they mostly support Republicans. Which is why nobody ever holds them accountable for hiring undocumented workers.
Pete: all for it.
How do we make it happen? All those folks that WANT illegals here are against easy E-verification type programs, they've stood in the way for YEARS of a simple verification program.
Miz Misfit:
I have said for years, even on here, that I want the illegals gone, and that I don't care what it costs the farmers.
'Tis your supporters (see above in comments) that keep arguing "Who is gonna pick the vegetables? "Who is gonna do the work "that americans won't do?"", (They really mean folks (especially Brown folks) who will do it as *cheaply* as these exploited people) not me that is saying that, nor most conservatives. They Liberals and immigrant supporters are the ones that want to help keep the cheap labor in the US , essentially easily abused slave labor as an underclass. (See Also Martha's Vineyard for a real example of how much they cared)
99% of conservatives want the illegals gone, and fully expect that the prices for things may rise because there will be no cheap labor. They don't care because they are tired of the illegals. It isn't the Conservatives that look the other way or enable legislation to allow them to stay. AFAIK there are no Conservative (or "Red") "Sanctuary Cities", only Blue ones led by Liberals. It isn't conservatives that hinder the removal of Illegals. It is YOUR side.
No way can you spin it that it is Conservatives that caused this: You and your side own it. If you think otherwise then you are delusional...If you say otherwise then you are lying.
The farmers employing migrants aren’t liberals. The meatpacking companies employing migrants, including children, aren’t liberals.
You know this, B.
Some are, some aren't. They are business-men who chase profits.
But you failed to address (all of) the other points. The issue of Illegals is not caused by nor promulgated by Conservatives, but rather by Liberals. You conveniently ignored all of my examples. '
Tisn't the conservatives who shelter and protect illegals, who have
Sanctuary Cities," nor is it conservatives who block legislation that would make it harder (and uneconomical) to employ illegals.
It isn't Conservatives who keep crying "Who Will pIck the Crops!' and "Who will build our houses?" and who want the low wages.
That's on your people.
You can ignore it, not address it, dance around the truth and blame farmers and business men who want cheap labor....but your side wants cheap labor too, and they are the ones preventing any solution to the illegal issue.
A "guest Worker" program still gives cheap (slave) labor, still exploits Brown People, and still doesn't address the illegals living in the country . Again, all on the Liberals elected to government (and made 2 X worse in 4 years of Biden's people running the country).
Grow up and deal with the fact that is is the Liberals who have made this problem, You aren't stupid, you can do logic and wee what it is even if you want to hide from it and refuse to admit it like an 8th grade girl who got caught. Doesn't change the facts.
Perhaps if conservatives would compromise on some sort of path to citizenship, liberals would compromise on some sort of e-verification process. This could all be included in some sort of rational immigration policy that this country needs to have, because let's face it, our citizens aren't having enough babies to maintain the consumer base needed to sustain our capitalist economy.
Unfortunately, compromise has become a dirty word. Even though the founding fathers basically developed a form of government dependent on it.
Finally, how about we remember that all these "illegals" are human beings. Maybe we could remember to treat them like human beings.
Pete
Pete, I keep coming back to the point that, whenever the Congress gets close to a deal in immigration reform, somebody like Trump kills it.
Treating the stranger humanely was a key tenet of the guy who founded the religion that the "deport all brown people" crowd claim to follow.
Comrade Misfit, I do understand. I just find it frustrating that there are solutions out there, but they won't be implemented because modern day politics is more about winning than governing.
And, as a recovering Catholic, don't get me started about the hypocrisy of modern day religion.
Pete
"Path to citizenship" is like the promise of a "ONE Time Amnesty"
THe DEMS have lied too many times for anyone to believe them. They also aided and abetted the huge increase in border crossings.
We COULD have some decent immigration reform....IF we had a secure border to start (and to stop the invasion), and and E-verification system so we could police these illegal invaders ...and some prevention of these people from getting public aid meant for citizens.
But every single attempt to fix those things ahs been stymied by the Liberals.
Plus, of course, the "Sanctuary Cities" and the other liberal programs designed to shelter those illegal border crossers and give them a place to hide .
Wasn't there an amnesty under your revered St. Ronnie?
B, it's difficult to take you seriously when you make such identifiable mistakes.
"But every single attempt to fix those things ahs been stymied by the Liberals."
It was only two years ago or so that a bipartisan deal on an immigration policy was set to be voted on, but Trump torpedoed it because he didn't want Biden to have a win. Plus it would eliminate an issue that gets his base cranked up.
And don't start up with any talk of RINOs, because Sen. Lankford (R-OK) was the lead negotiator for the Republicans, and he is solidly conservative.
So, no, every single attempt to fix those issues HASN"T been stymied by liberals.
Your "I'm right; your wrong" attitude towards issues doesn't go very far when you show yourself to be wrong on occasion.
Pete
Pete: I am confused....."Trump torpedoed it because he didn't want Biden to have a win"
Who was president if Biden was gonna have a "win" but Trump stopped it?
Seriously, can you explain the dichotomy in that statement?
Can you show me the senate bill?
I think you are delusional, but I am open to finding holes in my knowledge, so enlighten me.
PS: We've gone far from the original subject of ICE and their issues.
B, there is no dichotomy. Trump was running for president and he did not want Biden to have a win. The bill was well on its way to passage when Trump shot off his mouth and his lackies in the Senate switched their votes.
I am really surprised that you've forgotten about that. To the point that I'm starting to suspect you of trolling. Don't be doing that, not here.
"GOP leaders in the House stated that the bill — negotiated by Sens. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.) and James Lankford (R-Okla.) — was already “dead on arrival.”"
and:
"Republicans backed away from the package Tuesday, deriding the process used to write the legislation and heaping criticism on provisions they claimed would allow 5,000 migrants into the country each day — an issue Republican negotiators ultimately could not refute."
That is what ultimately killed the bill,
Yes, Trump's derision and disapproval helped, but it wasn't all that popular even before he spoke.
Fact is: it was a crap bill that would not likely have made it to a vote, but you can believe what you want to believe...
Blame Trump for it if you wish, but the Conservative voters were against it no matter what he said.
Amazing how much power you think he had even before the election.
P.S: Re: the amnesty under Reagan: That's why no one trusts the democrats on Immigration and immigration reform...they promised to fund more border patrols and other measures to close the border but them the DNCY folks reneged on that deal and removed funding instead, leaving the border wide open.
This taught everyone not to trust the Democrats when it comes to border security and immigration reform. They have fought against closing the border ever since. It appears that they WANT unhindered illegal invaders crossing the border.
What's amazing is how much power Trump had over the Republican party.
GOP House leadership didn't back away until Trump, with help from Hannity, Coulter and other Fox personalities, told them to. The bill might not have been perfect, but it was a compromise with both sides making concessions.
But as you quoted from the article, "Republicans backed away from the package ..." In other words, Conservatives stymied the process, which is in direct opposition to your earlier statement--"But every single attempt to fix those things ahs been stymied by the Liberals."
To get back on subject, maybe, if we had a negotiated immigration policy, we wouldn't need ICE brutalizing citizens and non-citizens alike.
Pete
The "Bipartisan" bill was a no go from the beginning. No conservative wanted it, the promise of at least 5000 illegal being allowed to enter PER DAY was one of the no go provisions. So was the lack of closure of the border, as was the easy path to citizenship, which was, essentially, amnesty.
IT WASN"T GONNA PASS NO MATTER WHAT.
There wasn't anything to vote FOR.
It wasn't a compromise. Trump didn't tank the bill it died on it's own. Do you people even read the articles you post? It was pretty specific even in that article that the bill wasn't ever gonna pass no matter if rump disapproved or not.
Maybe, if our country hadn't been invaded by illegal border crossers welcomed by the Democrats, we wouldn't need ICE to be deporting people.
Make no mistake, I want the illegals GONE. THey are, despite the (totally unsupported) DNC claims, a drain upon our society.
But the tactics and people employed by ICE are despicable.
Go ahead and believe what you want, B. The bill would have passed the Senate because Lankford was a respected GOP member with lots of clout and Dems had a slight majority. In the House, the GOP had an even slimmer majority than they have now. If Johnson had allowed a vote, it would have passed with moderate Republicans joining Dems. The quotes you cherry picked from the article came after Trump started beating the drum to tank the bill. I read the article. I also read articles as it took place.
You need to take a moment to get out of your own echo chamber every once in a while.
Pete
as you say. I think you are mistaken as to how much power he had then, and really, by how much power he has today.
It wasn't like the Clinton or Soetoro years where your party was led by a charismatic figure and the folks on that side of the aisle just voted in lockstep.
Yah, yah, defaulting back to "whataboutism" is a sign of a losing argument.
What "Whataboutism"?
I was refuting the claim that Trump had that much power and was solely responsible for it tanking.
If you think that is "whataboutism" then I am sorry for not being clearer.
Post a Comment