╌>

Democrats Warn Trump Of Dangerous Precedent Set By Law Enforcement Raiding Homes Of Political Opponents

  

Category:  Satire

Via:  gregtx  •  3 weeks ago  •  44 comments

Democrats Warn Trump Of Dangerous Precedent Set By Law Enforcement Raiding Homes Of Political Opponents
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Following this week's DHS raid on Congresswoman Ilhan Omar's home, Democrats warned President Donald Trump that using law enforcement to target political opponents could set a dangerous precedent.

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T


WASHINGTON, D.C. — Following this week's DHS raid on Congresswoman Ilhan Omar's home, Democrats warned President Donald Trump that using law enforcement to target political opponents could set a dangerous precedent.

Omar, who is reportedly under investigation for immigration fraud, angrily denounced the "lawfare" targeting her and cautioned that Republicans could one day find themselves on the receiving end of similar raids.

"This is an incredibly dangerous escalation. Sending law enforcement into the homes of people in the party currently out of power? Republicans are playing with fire," said House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries. "Crossing this line threatens the very foundations of our democracy. You think these things happen only in banana republics, but now they're happening on our own shores. It's an alarming development we never dreamed we'd see in America."

Democratic leaders urged Trump to consider how these tactics might be used against Republicans — or even him personally — should they ever lose control of the federal government.

"Today, it's a member of Congress. Tomorrow, it could be a former president," Jeffries continued. "Imagine armed federal agents descending on a former president's private residence while he's considering another run for office. Searching his home. Going through his and his wife's belongings. I know it sounds far-fetched, but that's the nightmare scenario we're inviting here. Surely Republicans wouldn't want to open that door."

At publishing time, Democrats had vowed to put an end to political persecution by arresting everyone involved as soon as they regained power.


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
GregTx
Professor Participates
1  seeder  GregTx    3 weeks ago

512

 
 
 
Hal A. Lujah
Professor Participates
2  Hal A. Lujah    3 weeks ago

Just like everything else, it’s only wrong when democrats do it.  Republicans, hang on to your faux outrage until then.

 
 
 
Snuffy
Professor Participates
2.1  Snuffy  replied to  Hal A. Lujah @2    3 weeks ago

No, it's wrong when either side does it while in power in Washington. But it is very hypocritical of Democrats to cry about this considering the actions taking during the Obama and Biden administrations. 

But hey, what would a politician be without being hypocritical...

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.1.1  TᵢG  replied to  Snuffy @2.1    3 weeks ago
But it is very hypocritical of Democrats to cry about this considering the actions taking during the Obama and Biden administrations. 

What specific cases do you have in mind in which Obama or Biden used lawfare to prosecute political opponents without legitimate cause?

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Participates
2.1.2  Split Personality  replied to  Snuffy @2.1    3 weeks ago

So I seem to remember both Pence and Biden's residences and offices were raided and resulted in a few doc, some very old that they should not have had, regardless of the excuse, but they were co-operative.

If the Satire is alluding raiding Mar Alago, yes Jefferies' comments were tone deaf.

But everyone surely agrees that Trump took  many things from the WH for spite and refused to cooperate with those FBI and others just trying to do their jobs.

There are clearly  50+ boxes on the stage  and 38 more in a bathroom, not important enough to unpack.

It was just the beginning of his "above the law" attitude.

512 512

 
 
 
Snuffy
Professor Participates
2.1.3  Snuffy  replied to  Split Personality @2.1.2    3 weeks ago
It was just the beginning of his "above the law" attitude.

Not so sure that was the beginning. But I believe most politicians believe they are above the law or at least that they won't get caught. But this seed isn't about Trump. It's about Democrats who are crying foul and stating the raid on Omar's home is political retribution and I find it very hypocritical of them. The raid was backed by a warrant signed by a magistrate who, from reporting, really could not be called a Trump or Republican surrogate. Perhaps we should let the investigation proceed and the facts come out. 

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Guide
2.1.4  sandy-2021492  replied to  Snuffy @2.1.3    3 weeks ago
I find it very hypocritical of them.

They also cried foul when James Comey was indicted.  Did you find that hypocritical?

I notice you didn't answer TiG's question.

 
 
 
Snuffy
Professor Participates
2.1.5  Snuffy  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.1.4    3 weeks ago
They also cried foul when James Comey was indicted.  Did you find that hypocritical?

For which one? In regards to the Instagram post that was the picture of the sea shells, yes that was absolutely wrong and Democrats were correct to call it out. The one about lying to Congress, I felt that one should have gone further. A federal judge dismissed that one, not on the merits but based on his decision that the US Attorney who brought the case was unlawfully appointed. 

I notice you didn't answer TiG's question.

That is correct, there are some who I will not respond to anymore as it's not worth my time. Ignore can be a wonderful feature at times.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
2.1.6  devangelical  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.1.4    3 weeks ago
I notice you didn't answer TiG's question.

he can't ...

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Guide
2.1.7  sandy-2021492  replied to  Snuffy @2.1.5    3 weeks ago
A federal judge dismissed that one, not on the merits but based on his decision that the US Attorney who brought the case was unlawfully appointed. 

Was the judge's name Aileen Cannon?

 
 
 
Snuffy
Professor Participates
2.1.8  Snuffy  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.1.7    3 weeks ago
A federal judge dismissed that one, not on the merits but based on his decision that the US Attorney who brought the case was unlawfully appointed. 
Was the judge's name Aileen Cannon?

Not sure why you would use that name as I find it hard to believe she would have dismissed the case in that manner. Isn't she a Trump appointed judge who the left believes is in the pocket of Trump?

No, the judge who dismissed that case was U.S. District Judge Cameron Currie who was nominated for the position by President Clinton back in 1994. 

Federal Judge Dismisses Comey and James Indictments | Lawfare

I also see that you liked the comment in 2.1.6 that was posted 35 minutes after my post of 2.1.5 where I stated I do not respond to some members of this site. The posting you liked contained only two words, "he can't". 35 minutes after I explained why I did not respond to TiG. Why did you click 'like' on that comment when you already had my reasoning as to why I did not respond to TiG? 

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.1.9  TᵢG  replied to  Snuffy @2.1.5    3 weeks ago
there are some who I will not respond to anymore as it's not worth my time

Ignoring challenges and rebuttals just illustrates that you have no case.

You were asked a perfectly reasonable question; basically to provide the basis for your claim:

TiG@2.1.1 ☞ What specific cases do you have in mind in which Obama or Biden used lawfare to prosecute political opponents without legitimate cause?
 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Professor Participates
2.1.10  Right Down the Center  replied to  Snuffy @2.1.5    3 weeks ago
there are some who I will not respond to anymore as it's not worth my time. 

Amen to that

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
2.1.11  devangelical  replied to  TᵢG @2.1.9    3 weeks ago
Ignoring challenges and rebuttals just illustrates that you have no case.

when the questions get too difficult, the debate usually devolves into semantics ...

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Professor Participates
2.1.12  Right Down the Center  replied to  devangelical @2.1.6    3 weeks ago

Um. Noooo

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Professor Participates
2.1.13  Right Down the Center  replied to  devangelical @2.1.11    3 weeks ago

He clearly said waste of time. Easy to understand.

But you are correct that semantics is often why it is a waste of time

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Guide
2.1.14  sandy-2021492  replied to  Snuffy @2.1.8    3 weeks ago
I also see that you liked the comment in 2.1.6 that was posted 35 minutes after my post of 2.1.5 where I stated I do not respond to some members of this site. The posting you liked contained only two words, "he can't". 35 minutes after I explained why I did not respond to TiG. Why did you click 'like' on that comment when you already had my reasoning as to why I did not respond to TiG?

Your explanation comes across as disingenuous.  The comment I liked seemed to convey the situation as I see it more accurately.

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Participates
2.1.15  Split Personality  replied to  Snuffy @2.1.3    3 weeks ago
KNV36Olt8iPjvcwMIsg4iysSZLc.svg

Basis for the Raid on Rep. Ilhan Omar’s Residence

Federal authorities raided Rep. Ilhan Omar’s Washington, D.C., home on October 12, 2026, as part of an ongoing federal criminal investigation into possible immigration fraud CNBC +1 .

According to multiple reports, the search was executed by Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) , the investigative arm of the Department of Homeland Security, under a judicially authorized search warrant secured by the Department of Justice Fox News +1 . The DOJ confirmed the operation was part of a “criminal” probe, and sources close to the investigation said it focused on Omar’s immigration paperwork , which was completed by her late father when she was a child after her family fled Somalia CNBC +2 .

The alleged issue involves questions about the accuracy of documents filed for her immigration and naturalization , including her date of birth The Christian Science Monitor . If it were found that she was already 18 at the time her father filed the application, it could raise legal questions under U.S. immigration law, potentially affecting her citizenship status The Christian Science Monitor . However, Omar has not been charged and has denied any wrongdoing, calling the raid “political intimidation” and “an attempt to weaponize federal law enforcement” CNBC +1 .

The investigation has been described as long-running and complex , with HSI, the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Minneapolis, and DOJ involved favicon?url=www.lawcommentary.com Law Commentary +1 . The raid occurred just weeks before the midterm elections , which some critics note is unusual given DOJ norms that generally avoid major investigative actions against candidates within 60 days of an election The Christian Science Monitor +1 .

In summary, the stated basis for the raid was a federal criminal fraud investigation into Omar’s immigration paperwork filed by her father as a child , though the exact details of the alleged violations have not been made public, and Omar maintains her innocence CNBC +2 .

If that doesn't smell, what does?

They cannot punish the deceased father, so what is the point?  Accuse her of collusion, strip her of citizenship and toss her out of Congress?

All of this within 30 days of the election seems like foul play given prior norms by the DOJ when all candidates were usually white christian men?

It stinks.

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Guide
2.1.16  MrFrost  replied to  Split Personality @2.1.15    3 weeks ago
Basis for the Raid on Rep. Ilhan Omar’s Residence

Lawfare.

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Participates
2.1.17  Split Personality  replied to  MrFrost @2.1.16    3 weeks ago

Omar's father died in 2020 of COVID.

Reports from "witnesses" say that he was a Somalian soldier in the 1960's, loyal to the dictator and not entitled to "refugee" status.

HSI is looking for "proof" of the father's sins.

Lawfare seems to be accurate.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
2.1.18  Sean Treacy  replied to  Split Personality @2.1.15    3 weeks ago
hey cannot punish the deceased father, so what is the point?

You don't understand what the point is of punishing someone for lying under oath to become a citizen? Not to mention all sorts of other fraud? 

Accuse her of collusion, s

No fraud and lying under oath.

n seems like foul play given prior norms by the DOJ when all candidates were usually white christian men?

Ah yes, the DOJ convinced a ACT Blue and Clinton donating  judge to get omar for no legitimate purpose because she's a Muslim (when not marrying her brother, at least) woman. You figured it out. 

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Guide
2.1.19  sandy-2021492  replied to  Sean Treacy @2.1.18    3 weeks ago
when not marrying her brother, at least

Evidence?

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
2.1.20  Sean Treacy  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.1.19    3 weeks ago

She married her brother in a Christian ceremony performed by a Christian minister.  Which would be a very odd thing for Muslims to do. Unless, of course, the marriage was a sham and the participants didn’t want it to have any actual meaning or be recognized in their culture, particularly when the bride would soon have another child with the man she previously married in a Muslim ceremony.

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Participates
2.1.21  Split Personality  replied to  Sean Treacy @2.1.18    3 weeks ago
you don't understand what the point is of punishing someone for lying under oath to become a citizen?

A 12 year old or a minor who obtained citizenship at age 17?

Not to mention all sorts of other fraud? 

I'm sure you can fill us in on that.

The progressive congresswoman, a longtime political foe of President Donald Trump , has characterized the search as part of an intimidation effort meant to "target political enemies and weaponize federal law enforcement."

"I will not be silenced," she wrote on social media earlier this week. Responding to the prospect, first laid out by the Wall Street Journal, of federal authorities working toward deporting the congresswoman, Omar's office said: "Trump's push to strip her of her citizenship and deport her has no basis in the law and has no precedent."

"This isn't a legitimate law enforcement action," Omar's top spokesperson, Jacklyn Rogers, said in a statement to USA TODAY. "It is an authoritarian move to silence an opponent right before an election where he and his party will be rejected by Americans in historic proportions."

The Trump administration has spent the past year reviving denaturalization, a legal tool once reserved mostly for war criminals and terrorism suspects. For decades, the government averaged about 11 such cases a year, according to an analysis from the Migration Policy Institute. Since Trump returned to office, the Justice Department has filed at least 163 cases and set a goal of 250 this month . But Omar, who was born in Somalia and came to the United States as a refugee in 1995, is by far the effort’s most prominent target.

At the center of the case is a question about Omar’s age. She became a citizen in 2000, at 17, through her father’s naturalization, a route open only to children under 18. Investigators are trying to determine whether the family misstated her birth date so she would qualify, and whether her father, Nur Omar Mohamed, misrepresented his military history when he sought legal status.

The age question "seems to be the key focus now," one of the officials said. 

Proving either would likely not be enough to deport her on its own. The government would first have to persuade a federal judge to revoke her citizenship, either in a civil case or through a criminal conviction, which triggers revocation automatically. Only then would she revert to her earlier immigration status and face possible removal. Her father, who would be central to any such case, died in 2020 from complications related to the coronavirus.

Federal probe of Ilhan Omar aimed at revoking citizenship, deporting her

Lawfare. 

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
2.1.22  Sean Treacy  replied to  Split Personality @2.1.21    3 weeks ago
d or a minor who obtained citizenship at age 17?

Who was 18 when she obtained citizenship....

I'm sure you can fill us in on that.

Sure. Look at her wildly varying financial disclosures along with the seized communications with her fraudster sister that helped the Act Blue donating judge sign off on the search of Omar's residence. 

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
Professor Guide
2.1.23  sandy-2021492  replied to  Sean Treacy @2.1.20    3 weeks ago

You've made a claim.  You haven't provided evidence.

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Participates
2.1.24  Split Personality  replied to  Sean Treacy @2.1.22    3 weeks ago
Who was 18 when she obtained citizenship....

Not according to the governments own records, she was 17.

If you believe this then it's no wonder you believe the twisted logic behind supposedly marrying a brother.

Apparently the whole family planned this in the 1990's and killed the father with COVID in 2020

and the super investigators at HSI  (ICE)  are just determined to bring this year's long investigation to fruition,

some day?

jrSmiley_88_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Snuffy
Professor Participates
2.1.25  Snuffy  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.1.14    3 weeks ago

Your explanation comes across as disingenuous. The comment I liked seemed to convey the situation as I see it more accurately.

So your thinking is that the comment where I cannot answer a question is something you see more accurately than the simple explanation that I am utilizing a feature of this site and ignoring a poster? Even when I stated that I was ignoring said poster?
[deleted][✘]
 
 
 
George
PhD Expert
2.1.26  George  replied to  Snuffy @2.1.25    3 weeks ago

[deleted][✘]

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
Professor Quiet
2.1.27  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  Sean Treacy @2.1.20    3 weeks ago

[.][✘]

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
2.1.28  Trout Giggles  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @2.1.27    3 weeks ago

Now they'll all claim Snopes is biases where a few weeks ago they were all loving Snopes

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Professor Participates
2.1.29  Right Down the Center  replied to  Snuffy @2.1.25    3 weeks ago

[deleted][✘]

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Guide
2.1.30  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Snuffy @2.1.3    3 weeks ago

[deleted][✘]

 
 
 
Right Down the Center
Professor Participates
2.1.31  Right Down the Center  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.1.30    3 weeks ago
removed for context
 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Guide
2.1.32  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.1.30    3 weeks ago

[deleted][✘]

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Professor Guide
2.1.33  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Right Down the Center @2.1.31    3 weeks ago

[deleted][✘]

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Participates
3  Split Personality    3 weeks ago

in any event, good to see ya Greg

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
4  Sean Treacy    3 weeks ago

Yeah, I expected Democrats to be throwing parades and celebrating that no one is above the law. 

It's almost like they didn't mean anything they said when it came to prosecuting Trump. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
4.1  JohnRussell  replied to  Sean Treacy @4    3 weeks ago

Trump has not been found "innocent" in a court of law in ANY of the prominent cases brought against him.  He has either been found guilty or liable, or he had them quashed through stalling, the SC, or an election. 

The idea that he has been unjustly targeted is bizarre but not unexpected. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
4.2  JohnRussell  replied to  Sean Treacy @4    3 weeks ago

Perhaps the two biggest lies of the past 10 years are that Trump was a victim of a "Russia hoax" and that he was unfairly put on trial or investigated. 

He's a bad man, and criminal in nature. When is that going to get through thick MAGA heads ? 

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
4.2.1  Trout Giggles  replied to  JohnRussell @4.2    3 weeks ago

He's a Russian asset and that makes him a traitor

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
4.2.2  devangelical  replied to  Trout Giggles @4.2.1    3 weeks ago

I can only think of one way that asshole is ever getting a bronze plaque with his name on it anywhere in DC ...

 
 
 
evilone
Professor Guide
4.3  evilone  replied to  Sean Treacy @4    3 weeks ago
I expected Democrats to be throwing parades and celebrating that no one is above the law. 

What do you think they are going to find now they didn't find in 2019 when they investigated her last time?

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
5  devangelical    3 weeks ago

 
 

Who is online





74 visitors