They went to a judge and got a warrant to investigate the scene - a public area, that’s already unusual - and the brownshirts refused.
The level of bullshit went up a lot more just then.
They went to a judge and got a warrant to investigate the scene - a public area, that’s already unusual - and the brownshirts refused.
The level of bullshit went up a lot more just then.
If you want a real answer instead of knee jerk hatred towards cops:
Cops are local police, and have local authority. They do not have jurisdiction or authority over federal agencies.
If they moved on ICE, that would literally start a Civil War. As law would become the word of local authority versus federal authority in determining who has any.
The officers in Minnesota are not defending ICE. They’re trying their best to not be the ones that start the Civil War ICE is trying to.
Because ICE has federal authority, anything local authority does will create a conflict that ICE and Trump will use to justify martial law. They want to use our military to invade swing states, so the Police in Minnesota are trying to prevent that through not openinly engaging with ICE agent provocateurs.
In other words, the states shouldn’t exercise their own authority or else the feds will keep escalating the things they’re already doing? At this point I don’t see any reason to believe that Trump won’t declare martial law regardless of what Minnesota does. The question isn’t whether or not he will escalate, it’s whether or not there will be resistance.
Imo, the question is who fires the first shot. If it’s Minnesota PD, Trump will engineer them into the enemy and have a larger pool of people believing him.
If it’s ICE, and continues to be ICE, they will continue to lose support, and more importantly, continue to lose in the hearts and minds of those knowing where this is going.
As long as ICE keeps shooting first and asking quastions later, when things eventually escalate, they will meet the largest amount of resistance instead of the weakest.
Let the antagonizers make it clear who is antagonizing, and you absolutley will have a resistance.
At this point, I think we’re 1 more ICE shooting away from every American with a gun showing up to the Capitol to peacefully protest the same way it was done Jan 6th.
Police of a state have jurisdiction about the unlawful murder of their own citizens. The 10th amendment specifies powers not explicitly given to the feds belong to the state. The feds control interstate commerce, foreign relations, that’s about it. They have ursurped a lot of authority over the centuries, but claiming they can execute people contrary to both federal and state law and hold themselves harmless is a new one.
You might want to associate me with cop haters making that point, because you can’t argue the actual point. Local authority includes people executed locally contrary to law.
By not charging, and laying down, they guarenteed impunity, not a thing for federal agents to think twice about. They don’t have to worry about a state grabbing them, shipping them back. Not unless they cross the federal leadership.
Arguments that federals can execute citizens under false pretense contrary to law with impunity would never be accepted by red states, yet here you are.
I agree with everything you said. HOWEVER.
No police officer wants to be the one that gets the 10th Amendment challenged in court. These rules you described only exist UNTIL they are challenged.
Do you want them to be challenged given the current SCOTUS?
I don’t. As it would be a literal constitutional crisis. One that our currupt SCOTUS would forever change the norms of given the opportunity. State police are making sure they aren’t the ones providing said opportunity.
Because once SCOTUS corrupts the constitution, we will be actively in a civil war between their interpretation of the constitution, and what was before.
I’m aware of what the rules are. I’m also aware of how most of them have changed through Trumps court and likely will continue to given any and all opportunity.
It’s wise to not give them any.