Fake videos and conspiracies fuel falsehoods about Los Angeles protests - CBS News

authentic pictures of National Guard members sleeping on the floor of a federal building in Los Angeles this week

Well, since the feds didn’t bother to coordinate with local officials, I guess it shouldn’t come as a surprise that these folks are sleeping in the floor. Pathetic failure of leadership. Want to see waste, fraud, and abuse? There it is.

Want to see waste, fraud, and abuse? There it is.

I saw some blurb on the web about the anticipated cost of getting the NG involved at about $135 million for a minimal duration, no estimate on the marines landing yet, his birthday parade another $45 million, and doubled the budget of the new Kennedy Center well over $100 million to turn it into the cultural jewel in the maga crown.

Pathetic failure of leadership. Want to see waste, fraud, and abuse? There it is.

I have to disagree. I served more than 20 years and all I see here is normal stuff. Apparently, some people have the idea that the military doesn't deploy until things like lodging, pay, medical for dependents and other such issues is set up first. I can assure you that is not the case. Nor should it be. In the military, the mission comes first. Everything necessary to support that mission comes first. That means such things like, in this case, riot gear, transportation, communications, training and the like immediately necessary to do the mission takes priority over lodging and the rest. It has been that way since militaries existed and it will always be that way. 

That doesn't mean the rest isn't also being done, but it takes time, especially when deployed into not just any city, but an American city. There are so many factors to consider that the logistics will likely be a nightmare. 

It's wasteful purely because it was unnecessary. That's also why it's fraudulent. It's abuse because good citizens who enlisted to do important work are being used as a political tool. And they're made to sleep on the ground while it's happening. There's nothing normal about any of this.

It's wasteful purely because it was unnecessary. That's also why it's fraudulent. It's abuse because good citizens who enlisted to do important work are being used as a political tool. And they're made to sleep on the ground while it's happening. There's nothing normal about any of this.

I don't recall; did you have the same opinion about the months long NG deployment in DC after J6? Because, other than their initial deployment, and perhaps the subsequent week afterwards, I felt about that as you do about their present use. However, I think one can legitimately be said to have been actually justified while the other was definitely simply a political tool for the purpose of presenting a particular image. 

As I said, for the J6 deployment in DC and probably the subsequent week after, NG deployment and presence made sense, but not the nearly five months long deployment it ended up being. I clearly remember what the Dems and media were putting out for most of that time. Nonstop propaganda that hordes of rightwing militias and white supremacists were preparing to march on Washington and endless speculations, conspiracy theories and anything else they could come up with. 

In the current crisis, the Guard and Marines have been called in, not in anticipation of trouble, but after it had already started. Their continued presence becomes only more justified in the escalation of violence, rather than unjustified by the absence of it. And the claim that their deployment is to blame for the increase seems ludicrous to me, like saying "it's their fault because they increased their resistance to my unlawful activities, forcing me to be more violent. If they would have just done what we wanted in response to our violence, we wouldn't need the military involvement in the first place."

I don't recall; did you have the same opinion about the months long NG deployment in DC after J6?

Didn’t they leave them there in case there was more unrest related to the transfer of power? In that case, they already had an actual and violent riot. But there were still three more weeks to inauguration, and most of those rioters were still running free at that time. Given that context, it makes sense to have them in place until the process is done.

In the current crisis, the Guard and Marines have been called in, not in anticipation of trouble, but after it had already started.

There has barely been any violence from civilians in Los Angeles. Some, of course, but nothing ordinary law enforcement couldn’t handle.

In truth, most of the mayhem has come from cops, who just can’t wait to fire more tear gas, pepper balls, and rubber bullets at people who are just walking around. They even shot rubber bullets at a lone woman on an otherwise empty street, who was just trying to get to her apartment.

Didn’t they leave them there in case there was more unrest related to the transfer of power? In that case, they already had an actual and violent riot. But there were still three more weeks to inauguration, and most of those rioters were still running free at that time. Given that context, it makes sense to have them in place until the process is done.

Okay. While the "running free" part makes it sound as if what happened on J6 was ongoing for multiple days, it isn't unreasonable to have a Guard presence until the inauguration, although I think 25,0000 troops was grossly excessive and unjustifiable, given that there was no credible threat. That doesn't explain their deployment lasting to the end of May. 

The rest of your comment is your opinion, which you get to have and I'm not going to argue with. I have my own. 

I have to disagree. I served more than 20 years and all I see here is normal stuff.

Same here. Although I was in the Navy and had it a little easier, there were times where our sleeping arrangements were far less than ideal.

This is a nothingburger, especially since there have been many Marines who have countered this and specifically said they have slept in far worse conditions....war zone, anyone?

As far as the author, a self proclaimed  "fact checker" does not make one so. We have seen too many left wing "fact checkers" make claims against Tump when it was nothing more than a "I don't like what he said" momment.

but nothing ordinary law enforcement couldn’t handle.

I believe the LA Sherriff has said that he was grateful for the NG being there as his officers have been overwhelmed.

The most wrong thing happening here is this tendency to put effect before cause. 

ICE raids led to minor protests. National Guard presence escalated the situation and made even more people feel like the federal government was invading. Thus, more protests. Now you have Marines, which led to still more anxiety.

NOT the other way around.

This is all your opinion. 

The anti-American/ICE protestors had no business interfering in the ICE arrests.

They are the ones that started, then escalated the violence.

If they had just stayed out of legal proceedings, none of those would have happened.

To blame it on Trump/NG/ICE is just pure liberal insanity.

ICE raids led to minor protests.

Right. 

Because all "minor protests" involve trying to set people on fire.

 new pickup/drop off points showing up for ICE

AOC was last seen crying hysterically next to one 

The most wrong thing happening here is this tendency to put effect before cause.

There is a concept called "learning from the past", which would indicate that protests from the left cause significant damage to their communities. The past also indicates that such damage is not the fault of those who caused it but, rather, the 'authorities' that resisted the protestors 'just and righteous cause'. Or, as the protestors might put it, 'the will of the people'. 

You seem to subscribe to this view, as you seem to see proactive responses to the potential threat as an excuse for what we are seeing. 

There is a concept called "learning from the past", which would indicate that protests from the left cause significant damage to their communities.

Protests from anyone can lead to damage, just as sex can lead to children. But that is not always the case. In fact, it’s not even the case, most of the time.

Yesterday, across this country - and even in other countries - millions of people protested the actions of the Trump administration, without causing any damage at all.

So you may not be taking the right lessons from the past.

The past also indicates that such damage is not the fault of those who caused it but, rather, the 'authorities' that resisted the protestors 'just and righteous cause'.

Your statement implies that protestors are always the cause of any damage that happens. That is an extreme assumption not rooted in fact. 

When the authorities shoot tear gas and rubber bullets into a peaceful crowd or attack them with horses (as we saw in Los Angeles yesterday) they are absolutely the cause of the damage.

Your statement implies that protestors are always the cause of any damage that happens

UM, if protestors become violent and damage property, private or public, they are the CAUSE for that damage. No one else.

"When the authorities shoot tear gas and rubber bullets into a peaceful crowd or attack them with horses (as we saw in Los Angeles yesterday) they are absolutely the cause of the damage"

99 percent of the time of law enforcement fires tear gas or rubber bullets, it is because the protestors have become violent and CAUSED damage to public or private property. Law enforcement are well trained to try and disperse crowds of the become rowdy without those means, but if the persist and want to push back, then a shot in the ass with a rubber bullet is warranted. 

part makes it sound as if what happened on J6 was ongoing for multiple days

it's still going on ...

99 percent of the time of law enforcement fires tear gas or rubber bullets, it is because the protestors have become violent and CAUSED damage to public or private property.

That is naive and very much untrue.

youtu.be

Without some fake and fraudulent something or other there wouldn't be a MAGA.

[deleted][✘]

The people that want all of this to escalate into further violence are the ones posting the fake news. The story itself said Alex Jones is spreading conspiracy theories. And then there are the MAGA who want to show the protestors in the worst possible light so they will lie and post fake images and recycled crap

protestors in the worst possible light so they will lie and post fake images and recycled crap

Quick question, did those cars light themselves on fire, did the businesses loot themselves.  A better question is, if your opposed to ICE why rob an Apple store?

Had a friend ask me last night which stores to loot to save democracy better.

Had a friend ask me last night which stores to loot to save democracy better

How true, I don't remember any J6's, knocking over a Best Buy.  

I don't remember any J6's, knocking over a Best Buy

of course not, best buy has rest rooms ...

that had to be the dumbest comment ever...not yours bestie. Yours was funny

[deleted][✘]

It's absolutely HILARIOUS that the people claiming images are "fake" now are the very same people who supported fake images during a congressional shitshow.   AND they expect to be taken seriously.

All those fake images and videos of the riots seem to be spreading nationwide.    

Anti-ICE Protests Explode in 37 Cities—and It’s Getting Ugly

All those fake images and videos of the riots see

We can't overlook the reason these riots are taking place.  Imagine their horror as law enforcement actually doing the unthinkable and enforcing the law.  

Imagine their horror as law enforcement actually doing the unthinkable and enforcing the law.  

What a lame and thoughtless excuse. Does it not occur to you that there is a difference between enforcing the law and brutality? Have you not seen how the law is enforced while ignoring the rights of those who are accused?

If you refuse to consider all of this, please stop pretending you care about the law - because there is more to it than sending a bunch of armed thugs out to inflict themselves on the public in whatever way they like.

We can't overlook the reason these riots are taking place.

But you do overlook it. Maybe just once consider that all the people taking to the streets might have a fucking point.

What a lame and thoughtless excuse

What's lame is crying because laws are being enforced.  I mean, how stupid does one have to be?

But you do overlook it.

Not overlooking a damn thing.  I'm not dumb enough to call a riot a "peaceful protest".

Again I say, Maybe just once consider that all the people taking to the streets might have a fucking point.

because there is more to it than sending a bunch of armed thugs out to inflict themselves on the public in whatever way they like.

I guess with their last VP candidate out there calling LEO's the gestapo, the hysterics aren't going to stop anytime soon. 

Maybe just once consider that all the people taking to the streets might have a fucking point.

Considered and no.  They are crying because laws are being enforced. 

the people taking to the streets might have a fucking point.

They do, that the immigration laws suck.  Taking it out on people sworn to uphold the law will not get anything changed.  Their  anger is misdirected.  It should be directed toward their congressional representative who obviously are not being motivated to fix immigration laws.

Taking it out on people sworn to uphold the law will not get anything changed.

Couple o’ things.

First, yes it will. Protests work. Not all of them, to be sure, but a lot of them have an impact.

Second, ICE is not upholding the law. Neither are a lot of the police who are patrolling the streets. They enforce some laws, while ignoring others. When you trample on the rights of those you encounter, you don’t get to hide behind the claim “we’re just enforcing the law.”

It should be directed toward their congressional representative who obviously are not being motivated to fix immigration laws.

If you have seen any of the town halls this year, you know people have quite a bit to say to their representatives, but there are many instances of those representatives dismissing what they have to say - even mocking their own constituents.

So the protests are now escalating into the streets. And these protests are aimed at everyone in the system - law enforcement, legislators, and executives. They all better listen.

If you have seen any of the town halls this year, you know people have quite a bit to say to their representatives, but there are many instances of those representatives dismissing what they have to say - even mocking their own constituents.

Not only that but having local LE escort people out of the town hall when the questions got too tough and the rep didn't like being put on the spot

It should be directed toward their congressional representative who obviously are not being motivated to fix immigration laws.

That would mean that they are partially culpable for a shitty situation as they are the ones that voted in those congressional representatives who obviously are not being motivated to fix immigration laws.

You know they can't have that.

So the protests are now escalating into the streets. And these protests are aimed at everyone in the system - law enforcement, legislators, and executives.

You would think they should have learned the worst way to gain public support is to riot.  Even if it is minimal it is what makes it to right leaning media.  Just as peaceful is the only thing that makes it to the left wing media

They all better listen.

Or?  The more violent they get the less people will have an issue with an even stronger response.

Again I say, Maybe just once consider that all the people taking to the streets might have a fucking point.

They might.  

But calling LEOs "armed thugs" isn't helping the cause.

You know they can't have that.

I am sure they are all sitting back, having a cold brew, enjoying the show and thinking there is no blowback to them.

But calling LEOs "armed thugs" isn't helping the cause.

Seems they are stuck in the defund the police losing strategy.  Idiots.

First, yes it will.

Highly unlikely.  Do they even know what the goal is?  Do they even have a metric to use?  Or are they going to have a group tantrum and then claim afterward that they "raised awareness" like they usually do.

Protests work. Not all of them, to be sure, but a lot of them have an impact.

To be clear, you are equating "protest" with "taking it out on law enforcement".  I suspect that's not your intent.

If you have seen any of the town halls this year, you know people have quite a bit to say to their representatives, but there are many instances of those representatives dismissing what they have to say - even mocking their own constituents.

That's not an excuse to throw a Molotov cocktail at an immigration agent.

They all better listen.

Or what?  Or they'll lock up a few rioters and the rest will get bored and go home?  That's what usually happens.

But calling LEOs "armed thugs" isn't helping the cause.

But that's what one does when they have no real argument or anything of any value to bring.

But calling LEOs "armed thugs" isn't helping the cause.

When it’s the truth, I’m gonna say it. Shaming works. Accountability works.

But that's what one does when they have no real argument or anything of any value to bring.

You haven’t shown much interest in listening to anyone’s argument if it conflicts with the authoritarian agenda.

When it’s the truth, I’m gonna say it

Unfortunately, these days, it seems that opinion is a huge factor in many back-and-forth discussions claiming truth is on their side.

The two are not equal.

You haven't given me reason to show interest.  All I've seen is crying and whining with no real argument or anything of any value. 

When it’s the truth, I’m gonna say it. Shaming works. Accountability works.

Accountability works.  Name calling doesn't.  It just reduces the credibility of the people doing it.

When LEOs violate the law, we have accountability procedures to handle that.  They do not involve Molotov cocktails.

But that's what one does when they have no real argument or anything of any value to bring.

To be fair, if ICE showed up next door and carried off in handcuffs the recently widowed elderly Chinese woman who has lived in that house for decades, I'm not sure I'd be too pleased. 

It's a tense time for a lot of people.

To be fair, if ICE showed up next door and carried off in handcuffs the recently widowed elderly Chinese woman who has lived in that house for decades, I'm not sure I'd be too pleased.

More times than not, there is missing information put out as to WHY that elderly woman was taken into custody.  That's when we frequently see the left pull some fictitious story from their 4th point of contact and run with it. 

Of course they are. 

More times than not, there is missing information put out as to WHY that elderly woman was taken into custody.  That's when we frequently see the left pull some fictitious story from their 4th point of contact and run with it. 

I realize that, and I absolutely understand the bias in the media.

That doesn't change the personal aspect of all this.  It may be very different in NC, but here in Texas we've been had illegal immigrants living among us for so long we're sort of immersed. 

Most of these people work hard, they fit in, they make friends, and they become fine, upstanding members of their communities. Some have been doing that for a very long time.  So it would be frustrating to see them carried off in cuffs like they've just robbed a liquor store.  In that sense, I can definitely relate to Tacos view on the subject.

But I can relate to yours as well.  I realize there are laws, and I realize we have to enforce those laws.

But let's remember that they're really outdated and shitty laws and watching good people getting arrested is never pleasant.  Again, it's a tense time for a lot of people.

Are you referring to the armed thugs who are hurling Molotov Cocktails, bricks, rocks, and other hard objects at police and causing widespread damage and injury to others?

If you refuse to consider all of this, please stop pretending you care about the law

I love it how people pick and choose which law should be followed.  Breaking our immigration law is a crime, removing that person is not a crime. Trying to interfere with their removal is a crime, along with. Assault on a police officer and damage to property are all crimes. See how this works. 

I love it how people pick and choose which law should be followed.

... maga!

Some people see what they want to see, and refuse to look at what is right in front of them. Oh well.

I'm counting on it ...

You’d have to show me. If you like, I can show you cops assaulting journalists and peaceful protestors. Would you look?

I love it how people pick and choose which law should be followed.

Article I, Section 8. Article I, Section 9, Clause 7. First Amendment. Fourth Amendment. Fifth Amendment. Sixth Amendment. Eighth Amendment. Tenth Amendment. 

And by the way, ALL of those supersede anything ICE does.

Trying to interfere with their removal is a crime

What if the removal is unlawful. Do you care?

Assault on a police officer and damage to property are all crimes.

Sure. No one is saying otherwise. However, those things have been the exception, rather than the norm in the current event.

Do you know the argument for the Second Amendment? That it is there so the people can turn back a tyrannical federal government? What are you going to say if liberals take that course? 

Most of these people work hard, they fit in, they make friends, and they become fine, upstanding members of their communities.

There is a part that you are missing....they entered the country illegally or overstayed visas.  Upstanding members of their communities do the right thing.  Being here illegally or overstaying visas is not doing the right thing.

But let's remember that they're really outdated and shitty laws and watching good people getting arrested is never pleasant.  

Every administration has acknowledged this and NONE have done anything about it.  It still doesn't change the fact that, right now, there are millions her that shouldn't be here.

Upstanding members of their communities do the right thing

Bit of a strong statement.  It's not like people are perfect.  

Every administration has acknowledged this and NONE have done anything about it.

Exactly the point.  We finally have an administration willing to do something, and rather than do the smart thing, they're doing the loud thing.

We finally have an administration willing to do something, and rather than do the smart thing, they're doing the loud thing.

In order for the process to be reworked, the illegals have to be removed.  One step at a time.

Again I say, Maybe just once consider that all the people taking to the streets might have a fucking point.

They indeed may have a point. Problem is, that doesn't give people justification for burning, looting, vandalism or attacking law enforcement. That is, one cannot say that because I may have a point I therefore am justified in doing whatever I want because of it. How long will we be living in a civilization if whenever anyone thinks they have a point they think they can use such tactics to force their will on others that way? 

Further, just because one has a point doesn't make the point valid. That is one reason why reacting with violence as they are doing is not a valid solution. The people behind the Tulsa massacre had a point and they did what they did because of it. I think that most would agree that it wasn't a valid point, however. 

So the protests are now escalating into the streets. And these protests are aimed at everyone in the system - law enforcement, legislators, and executives. They all better listen.

You know there's an opposite side to this issue, don't you? In my opinion, they tend to be more law oriented. That's why we haven't seen protests like this one during Biden's admin, when he totally and intentionally failed to fulfill his duties regarding immigration. That is, no one was burning down anything or looting, vandalizing or trying to hurt law enforcement officers. 

But imagine if they started behaving the same way? If you think these sorts of protests are valid because they make a difference, what if the side you oppose takes you up on it? What do you think their target is going to be? Looting shops? Burning cars? Vandalism?

Or maybe they'll just go out and harm the people they think are causing harm? If violence can be a valid form of protest, why not? The rioters in LA and other cities are trying to impose their will through violence, so why not the other side? 

And if both sides are simply protesting by what you seem to be suggesting as valid forms of protest, where does it end and what sort of state will we end up with? 

Article I, Section 8. Article I, Section 9, Clause 7. First Amendment. Fourth Amendment. Fifth Amendment. Sixth Amendment. Eighth Amendment. Tenth Amendment.

You got me thinking so I decided to see if ChatGPT could clear things up when it comes to the legal processing of illegal aliens. Here's what I found. The red highlighted text are the questions I asked ChatGPT. Of course, this assumes ChatGPT isn't making mistakes. 

What is the legal process for removing an illegal alien for unlawful presence?

ChatGPT said:

The legal process for removing (deporting) an illegal alien—the legal term in U.S. immigration law—for unlawful presence involves several formal steps, grounded in the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). Here's how it typically works:

1. Identification and Apprehension

• Immigration authorities (e.g., ICE, CBP) identify someone who is unlawfully present in the U.S.—either because they entered without inspection or overstayed a visa.
• They may be apprehended during:
  • Border crossings
  • Workplace raids
  • Traffic stops or arrests for unrelated crimes
  • Immigration enforcement operations

1. Notice to Appear (NTA)

• If ICE decides to initiate removal proceedings, it serves the individual with a Notice to Appear (Form I-862).
• This document outlines:
  • The nature of the charges (e.g., illegal entry, overstay)
  • The factual basis for removal
  • The legal grounds under INA § 212(a) or § 237(a)
  • The requirement to appear before an immigration judge

1. Detention or Release

• The person may be:
  • Detained in an immigration facility
  • Released under conditions (e.g., bond, parole, alternatives to detention)

Some individuals are subject to mandatory detention depending on criminal history or immigration status.

1. Removal Proceedings (Immigration Court)

• The person appears before an immigration judge in a removal hearing.
• They have the right to:
  • Present a defense
  • Apply for relief from removal (see below)
  • Be represented by an attorney (at their own expense)
• If they fail to appear, a judge may issue a removal order in absentia.

1. Defenses and Relief from Removal

Even if unlawfully present, a person may request relief, such as:

• Asylum or withholding of removal
• Cancellation of removal (if they meet criteria like long presence and hardship to a U.S. citizen family member)
• Adjustment of status (if eligible through a family petition, for example)
• Deferred Action or prosecutorial discretion

1. Judge's Decision

• If no relief is granted and the judge sustains the charges, they issue a removal order.
• The person may:
  • Voluntarily depart (at their own expense)
  • Be deported (removed forcibly by ICE)

1. Appeals (if applicable)

• The individual can appeal the decision to the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) within 30 days.
• Further appeals may be made to the federal courts, though success rates are limited.

1. Execution of Removal Order

• ICE carries out the removal—either by:
  • Escorting the individual out of the country
  • Coordinating a voluntary departure
• If the person reenters illegally after removal, they can face felony charges and permanent bans on legal entry.

Special Case: Expedited Removal

Some undocumented immigrants can be deported without a full hearing if:

• They are caught within 100 miles of the border
• They have been in the U.S. less than 14 days
• Or, in some cases, less than 2 years without documentation (under expanded DHS authority)

This bypasses the immigration court process unless the individual claims asylum or fear of persecution.

Summary:

The U.S. legal process for removing someone based solely on unlawful presence includes identification, formal charges, court hearings, opportunities for relief, appeals, and finally removal—unless expedited removal applies. It's a process with due process protections, but the outcome depends on individual circumstances and legal eligibility for relief.

You said "Cancellation of removal (if they meet criteria like long presence and hardship to a U.S. citizen family member)". Please explain this further.

ChatGPT said:

Certainly — Cancellation of Removal is a form of discretionary relief under U.S. immigration law that allows certain non-citizens who are in removal (deportation) proceedings to avoid deportation and, in some cases, obtain lawful permanent resident (green card) status. There are different versions depending on the person’s immigration status.

Here’s a breakdown of the “Cancellation of Removal for Non-Permanent Residents,” which is what applies to many undocumented immigrants:

✅ Eligibility Requirements (INA § 240A(b)(1))

To qualify, the person must meet all of the following:

1. Continuous Physical Presence in the U.S. for at least 10 years

• The person must have resided continuously in the U.S. for at least 10 years before receiving the Notice to Appear (NTA).
• Certain events (e.g., criminal convictions, certain travel abroad) can stop the "clock."

• No serious criminal offenses (e.g., aggravated felonies, crimes involving moral turpitude).
• Dishonesty, fraud, or certain immigration violations can also disqualify someone.

• Certain crimes automatically bar eligibility, even if they occurred more than 10 years ago.

• This is the hardest standard to meet.
• The hardship must be significantly worse than what is normally expected from deportation.
• Examples: a child with a serious medical condition, a spouse with severe mental illness, etc.

🧑‍⚖️ How It Works in Court

• The person applies during their removal hearing by filing Form EOIR-42B with supporting documents.
• The immigration judge will consider:
  • Personal testimony
  • Evidence of hardship (e.g., medical records, psychological evaluations, school records)
  • Community ties, work history, character letters
• The judge has discretion to approve or deny the application, even if all criteria are technically met.

🏆 If Approved

• The individual is granted lawful permanent resident (green card) status.
• Removal proceedings are terminated.
• They may eventually apply for citizenship after holding a green card for 5 years (if eligible).

🚫 If Denied

• The removal order remains in effect.
• The person may be deported unless they appeal and win before the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA).

⚠️ Limitations

• Cap of 4,000 per year: Only 4,000 non-permanent residents can be granted this relief annually.
• One-time relief: Generally, a person can receive this only once.
• No approval without a strong hardship claim. Many applicants are denied for failing to meet the high bar for "exceptional and extremely unusual hardship."

🔍 Example

A woman has lived in the U.S. for 12 years, has no criminal record, and is raising a U.S. citizen son with a congenital heart defect who requires regular specialized treatment not available in her home country. She could apply for cancellation of removal and argue that her son's medical condition meets the "exceptional and extremely unusual hardship" standard.

In order for the process to be reworked, the illegals have to be removed. 

Why?  

Why not simply design an expedited work permit and have people apply at their nearest port of entry?  

That is, one cannot say that because I may have a point I therefore am justified in doing whatever I want because of it.

Has someone suggested otherwise?

You know there's an opposite side to this issue, don't you? In my opinion, they tend to be more law oriented.

The facts do not support that opinion. Federal agents are entering private property and seizing people without a warrant, as required by the 4th Amendment. They are incarcerating and deporting people without due process in violation of the 5th Amendment.

To accomplish this, Homeland Security has reallocated manpower and funding in violation of federal law, and they have rebuffed the demands of Congress to identify the source of funding. Congress is granted control over the purse in Article I. 

Some of the people being apprehended had legal status until it was arbitrarily revoked by the administration.

Additionally, they are led by a man convicted of 34 felonies. They exhibit allegiance to him personally instead of to the Constitution. He has pardoned over 1000 people convicted of crimes associated with the January 6 attack on the Capitol. A day extolled by the president as “a day of love.”

Many of these people committed acts of violence upon police officers. We have seen nothing this week that can compare to that level of violence. Nevertheless, the National Guard was deployed against the wishes of the governor and in violation of the law with which they tried to justify this action. Additionally, Marines have been deployed to Los Angeles, with no statutory justification even attempted.

These people are NOT law oriented. They are devoted to authoritarianism.

Why not have them come into the country LEGALLY first?  

Why not have them come into the country LEGALLY first?  

What difference would it make, and how would you know, anyway?

The same way we know now. 

The same way we know now. 

How is that?

Has someone suggested otherwise?

In my opinion, you seem to have done so. 

Taking it out on people sworn to uphold the law will not get anything changed.

Couple o’ things.

First, yes it will. Protests work. Not all of them, to be sure, but a lot of them have an impact.

5.1.7

The facts do not support that opinion.

Which itself is a matter of opinion, as I believe that the facts support my opinion. 

You went from me endorsing protests, as a general thing, to “doing whatever I want.” That’s a hell of a leap.

Which itself is a matter of opinion, as I believe that the facts support my opinion.

I did a little more than just state my opinion. I also supported it with relevant facts.

We have seen nothing this week that can compare to that level of violence.

Federal charges have been filed for throwing Molotov cocktails at police.

I did a little more than just state my opinion. I also supported it with relevant facts.

Maybe. I can't tell, though, because you state what you think are facts with nothing to back them up with. That is...

 Federal agents are entering private property and seizing people without a warrant, as required by the 4th Amendment. They are incarcerating and deporting people without due process in violation of the 5th Amendment.

To accomplish this, Homeland Security has reallocated manpower and funding in violation of federal law, and they have rebuffed the demands of Congress to identify the source of funding. Congress is granted control over the purse in Article I. 

Some of the people being apprehended had legal status until it was arbitrarily revoked by the administration.

... are simply statements you present as facts. For all I know, this is simply how you are interpreting events. 

These people are NOT law oriented.

Not sure I can agree. I do suspect that if they are acting legally, they aren't doing so for justice but for political ends. 

They are devoted to authoritarianism.

Odd that I feel similarly about the protesters, except that their form of authoritarianism appears to be direct democracy, also known as mob rule. Not sure that ended well for any of the states that thought that was a good idea. China and its cultural revolution, Pol Pot and his killing fields, Stalin and his purges, Hitler and his purges and so on. 

I read the entire post and nowhere did I see "feelings override everything else".

Yep. Two guys.

Yep. Two guys.

Well if you're bringing up Jan 6... and I don't know why you would.... nobody threw Molotov cocktails at police.

Well if you're bringing up Jan 6... and I don't know why you would.... nobody threw Molotov cocktails at police.

And I was actually agreeing with you through most of this thread, as i liked that which was said, but when reading the thread in its entirety, I don't believe it was you who m,emtioned Jan 6th, but it was tossed in there by a few as I assume a comparison of how the NG was used, or , possibly abused, and Im having to lean towards the latter, because of how the words rung, and rungs are either circular (firing squad) or D shaped on virtually all latters, thus the former opinions can be shaped by what is rung out like a wet rag, because the abundance of fake news, from many sides, tends to do truth overrides, and that doesn't allow for the actuality of the situation to preside, over, and outta here, N 

by the way, to any and all it may apply,  A Happy Mother Fckrs Day, if you are that guy.....

nobody threw Molotov cocktails at police.

I don’t know why this particular atrocity is worth going down the rabbit hole, but multiple people were arrested and prosecuted for possessing Molotov cocktails on January 6. Did they throw them? I have no idea, but it looks like they were ready to.

I don’t know why this particular atrocity is worth going down the rabbit hole,

Because the assertion these things were peaceful until the National Guard was called out is complete nonsense.  

but multiple people were arrested and prosecuted for possessing Molotov cocktails on January 6. Did they throw them? I have no idea, but it looks like they were ready to.

I know of one person arrested and charged for possession.  He never threw them.  But that should reinforce the point.  We're certainly not making excuses for the Jan 6 rioters, are we?  Why are we so desperate to do so for the LA rioters?

Why are we so desperate to do so for the LA rioters?

The facts and context for these situations are simply different. Why are you so desperate to equate current events with January 6? Maybe think about that.

Why are you so desperate to equate current events with January 6? Maybe think about that.

You're the one who brought up Jan 6.  Maybe think about that.

Maybe also think about the lunacy of this idea you're trying to sell here, that the NG was called out in some oppressive act of jackbooted thuggery to violate the rights of "peaceful protests". 

They were called out because some of these "mostly peaceful protesters" tried to set federal LEOs on "mostly peaceful fire".

You're the one who brought up Jan 6.

Yes. Not to equate the two events, but to show that Trump and his supporters are not all about the law. I said that Trump called it a “day of love” and pardoned over 1000 people, several of whom had long prison terms for assaulting police officers. Context matters. 

[deleted][✘]

The images were initially published by the San Francisco Chronicle on Monday and republished by California Gov. Gavin Newsom on X, who said they served as proof that the deployment was poorly planned, and claimed the soldiers were "without fuel, food, water or a place to sleep."

How many articles / pictures do I need to post regarding January 2021 of National Guard members sleeping on the marble floors of the Capital building before this faux outrage is put to rest .... That 'mostly peaceful' protest lasted for a matter of hours ... it was horrific - I sat gobsmacked watching January 6 unfold ... OOOOO such outrage over capital police being attacked - but 'y'all do not give a fuck about ICE agents being attached......?

If hypocrisy was an Olympic sport, there would be several gold medalists on this thread alone   .....  Gavin Newsom might actually be a contender to take Michael Phelps record for gold medals ...

WOW people quit pretending that LA has anything to do with the detention of illegals, Ferguson had anything to do with Michael Brown and Minneapolis had anything to do with George Floyd!!!  Tamir Rice, Walter Scott and the 9 African American men and women lives that were taken at Mother Emanuel AME in South Carolina were sooooo innocent compared to Trayvon Martin, George Floyd and Michael Brown ... OOOOOO but guess what they were not the poster children of a movement .. I swear my head will never stop shaking!