And another one, a Guardian piece on Tooze
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2026/jan/15/the-crisis-whisperer-how-adam-tooze-makes-sense-of-our-bewildering-age
Don't worry, nous, I remember when McKinney cited Freddie de Boer explaining that this was a guy who understood the left. (though I'm not suggesting you are doing the same with Krugman, it just always comes to mind when I think about who one cites and why)
About the Krugman link, Tooze and Klein both note, with astonishment, that the tariffs on India is higher than the tariffs on China.
A section I didn't highlight but was interested in, was Tooze's comparison with defeating Germany without Russian help to dealing with climate change without the Chinese on board, which was certainly thought provoking.
Fun chinese proverb for y'all
宁为太平犬，不做乱世人
Better to be a dog in times of peace than a human in times of chaos.
It seems I am often prefacing links (as I am here) with a mention of how often I disagree with the author on many particulars. Don't take my link to Krugman as an endorsement of Krugman as anything but an observer of this recent deal:
It's about the free trade agreement just negotiated between the EU and India. I'd have to go back and look over what Krugman says to see if his view is compatible with what Tooze is saying, but I think that the deal itself is very much in line with Tooze's (and Carney's) assertions.
The world is losing faith in the Peace of Westphalia. It will be interesting to see what sort of new order emerges out of that collapse -- assuming that we survive the environmental collapse that is likely to be brought on by all of this lack of a functioning order.
I think there is a lot to be said for "a multipolar order, which isn’t a single order but is multiple different orders that are overlapping, very unlike a simple hegemony, more like a mesh " Just for openers, it avoids the risks which are inherent in having a single point of failure.
That, I think, is the lesson of the moment. We had a (relatively) stable world order. With lots of disorder in local areas, but overall stability. But it was based (like it or not, believe it or not) on an implicit assumption that the US, for all its flaws and complicity in local disruptions, would act to keep the overall system stable. But that, whether we recognized it or not, made the US a single point of failure.
Worse, and definitely not recognized by anyone, it turned out the single point of failure was a single individual: whoever happened to be President of the United States. The failing at that one point has been an unfolding disaster, not only for the population of the US, but for the general stability of the world. The collapse has been slower on the international level. But it also looks less reversible.
As an aside, I would point out that the Chinese far prefer stability to chaos (both at home and abroad). They have chafed at America's dominance internationally. But I suspect they are starting to be concerned along the lines of "Be careful what you wish for." Having a loose cannon leading the US is ending the era of American dominance. But the chaos that accompanies the way that is happening....
Since I have the dashboard open, I'm going to quickly move GftNC's link to a separate post as I think that it is worth considering outside what has been discussed here.
Actually, that New Yorker piece is extremely interesting. It chimes with some of the stuff people have talked about here, but there's obviously a lot more detail about the defining characteristics of what has worked and not worked in the past.
The Kims are essentially god kings (in an officially atheist country).
Their births are accompanied by miracles and the current one was even claimed to be so perfect that he has no digestion.
That idea could be an adoption from something Mao said. He told the story that one day he by chance witnessed his (previously admired) teacher vomiting as the result of too much alcohol and that from then on he despised him. He then declared that the leader must never be associated with something like that, that people had to be indoctrinated to not even be able to imagine their leader having any human weaknesses, so people could not lose respect for him like he himself had.
Well, MAGA world has tendencies in that direction, and the religious part even more so. All images and videos contradicting that must eo ipso be fake. And Sharpie-Gate was just proof that His Orangeness was a better meteorologist than the guys doing it for a living.
In North Korea (as opposed to Russia or China) what we basically see is a monarchy in all but name.
That has the general upside, internally, of keeping the succession clear. Assuming that the successor is an adult, as was the case the first two times.
But the downside shows in cases like this where the obvious successor is very young. Perhaps her mother will be regent until she is older. Most likely, however, someone outside the family gets made regent. Which can be problematic.
And since I'm posting links, here's one (I don't have a gift button, but let's hope it's viewable) from the New Yorker, called What MAGA Can Teach Democrats About Organising - and Infighting. I haven't read it, but it sounded as if it might (or might not) be of interest to the ObWi commentariat:
lj asked me to post a guest link to this conversation between Ezra Klein and Adam Tooze, headlined How the World Sees America, which I was very happy to do!
Left-antisemitism arises mostly from anti-Zionism - when an anti-Zionist goes too far in associating Jewish ethnicity with the State of Israel. It can also come from an association of Jews with (unpopular) investment banking. (See also Zhdanov's coded phrase "rootless cosmopolitan".)
Right-antisemitism is quite different. The right is generally sympathetic towards Israel's killing Palestinians, whom it thinks of as browner than Jewish Israelis. But domestically, in the USA, it sees Jews as less American than white gentiles. The extremists are sympathetic to Hitler's ideas about 'Aryanization', denying, or even supporting, the holocaust. But they've got no special objection to Jewish financiers, unless (George Soros) they're openly leftist.
The left tends to see antisemitism from its side as little more than a careless overstepping of boundaries - that's the perspective of Jeremy Corbyn, in the UK. Whereas the right thinks that the only antisemitism that matters is showing insufficient support for Israel.
When commentators on each side speak of antisemitism, there's not that much in common in their meanings.
My campus is one of the campuses that had a pro-Palestinian encampment that was taken down with a massive law enforcement action. (I was not there. I had students and colleagues on either side whose perspectives and reasons for their involvement I can sympathize with. It was a complex situation. No one actually involved on either side wanted anyone else on campus to be physically threatened or harmed.)
I'm not going to get into a big post over this because bc has enough to respond to on other lines. I merely note that the public-at-large's understanding and descriptions of what was going on on campuses bear little resemblance to what it was actually like. The media accounts read like mock epics without any of the irony.
The actual drama and foment was tiny right up to the point where the helicopters and riot police showed up in overwhelming numbers and stormed in like they were dealing with a violent mob.
I'll leave this dogpile be except to note this I’m not arguing that at all. I’m simply pointing out that if a particular jurisdiction refuses to cooperate on ICE detainer requests and someone is released, ICE has to go get them. Simple as that. My understanding is that ICE is in the field in Minneapolis more because of the lack of cooperation in Hennepin County.
'Simple as that' does a lot of work here. As I noted, there are a number of factors that contribute to this, so sending 2,000 ICE and CBP agents rather than addressing any of those other factors makes this a disingenuous argument if made by the government, though I don't see it featuring in any of the DHS press releases. I suspect that if they said this, it would be legally actionable in that they are ignoring laws that have been made appropriately in order to get an outcome the DHS would prefer. This is law-breaking, regardless of which side does it.
bc: The left has occupied college campuses and aligned with terrorists using violence or threats thereof to intimidate Jewish students. Antisemitism has been mainstreamed.
"Jews will not replace us!" is a well-known chant on The Left, now?
Christianist schizophrenia w.r.t. "Jews" is pathological.
If I have said anything to you, or that would lead anyone here to think I would associate with anything like that, I sincerely apologize.
You didn't, bc. But it strikes me that you have not been exposed to the range of conservative voices that many of us have. It wouldn't be surprising, if so. It's easy to end up living in an information bubble, if one doesn't make an enormous effort not to do so. I see it all the time, and on many ideological sides, including the centrist, left and progressive.
bc - That Prairieland Detention Center case is definitely worth some examination. Bondi's people claim that 19 people so far are part of a "North Texas Antifa Cell," and are making much of the five guilty pleas.
Here are two articles about the action and the people who have been charged - from The Guardian and from The New Republic:
...of the two, I find TNR's article to be better supported and more nuanced, but the Guardian has more personal details about some of the people involved that seem like they are worth consideration.
Just based on what I have read about the case, I'd say that two or three of the people involved were dangerous idiot who might have aspired to being an antifa cell. Another small number were friends who were trying to help an idiot friend who did stupid things in support of them, but who weren't part of any plot at the start, and the majority were protesters who got caught in bad circumstances and exercised poor judgment in not backing out when the idiots started talking big in the encrypted group chat.
Throw the dudes with guns in jail. Treat the vandals like vandals.
As for the rest, I'd need to see a lot more evidence of actual coordination and planning and association before I believed anything that law enforcement said about the majority of the people who showed up.
Thank the gods none of them had a sandwich, or who knows what charges might have been filed?
"russell, I am truly shocked that anyone, much less multiple rank and file conservatives, have said anything like that to you."
I appreciate your saying this. Truly.
None of it worries me that much, because nearly all of that has been online, and a lot of folks use the online world to basically vent.
I don't think I've ever run into it here on ObWi. I spent some time on RedState, where it was dead common, and I also hang on Facebook a lot (for my sins), where it is not quite as common, but not uncommon.
I really don't worry about it, it's just an observation. Some people like to talk the big talk.
I’ve been hearing that for 25 years now. Not from fringe actors, from regular rank and file conservatives. It ain’t likely to happen, but it kind of sucks to try to have a conversation with people who apparently can’t wait to shoot me.
russell, I am truly shocked that anyone, much less multiple rank and file conservatives, have said anything like that to you. I'm actually dumfounded. I have never, ever heard anything like that directed at me (or anyone I know) and it must be truly painful and troubling to hear. I vehemently reject anyone who says anything like that, conservative or not. If I hadn't read so much of what you have written, and didn't know where your heart is (I do, and it's good), I frankly wouldn't believe you. But I do.
Honestly, I need to step back and let that sink in. It hurts me to hear that. I am so sorry. If I have said anything to you, or that would lead anyone here to think I would associate with anything like that, I sincerely apologize.
I would define the specific type of "dog pile" that I see here as follows: any conservative pushing back a bit or pointing out factors others may not have considered gets dumped on him or her not only having to respond to many community members here (which is expected), but also the burden of defending arguments that were never made (or at least were never intended to be made). More curiosity (on my part too) would be helpful.
lj: It’s quite spectacular to see a conservative feel that this process can be blown off when a new president comes in.
I'm not arguing that at all. I'm simply pointing out that if a particular jurisdiction refuses to cooperate on ICE detainer requests and someone is released, ICE has to go get them. Simple as that. My understanding is that ICE is in the field in Minneapolis more because of the lack of cooperation in Hennepin County. Michael Cain raises some good points on cooperation in general, but my understanding is those reasons are not why Hennepin County doesn't honor ICE detainers.
. . .if someone comes to ObWi and posts MAGA and Trump exculpating arguments (eg that the Minneapolis protesters will be largely to blame if as a result of their actions Trump invokes the Insurrection Act) . . .
I didn't argue that. If I was unclear, let me clear that up now. My point was that defunding ICE might give Trump an argument in favor of invoking the Act. I'm not advocating either the defunding or the invocation of the Act at all. Nor am I exculpating anyone. I have commented on how ICE can and should improve. I also think the actions of the protestors have bearing on the issue. If the protestors were just protesting instead of actively, intentionally, and in an organized way obstructing, there would be no argument for invocation of the Act. Is that "blaming" them? I don't think so. I'm just pointing out what they are doing.
wj: Gotcha on the clarification. I understand now.
Judging from the videos of those killings, I’d say a first degree (or whatever the term is in Minnesota) murder charge would be straightforward.
I don't think it is anywhere as straightforward as you might think. I could be wrong. To be clear: I'm not arguing the shootings were justified. What I have seen troubles me greatly. I'll await the full review.
The example of Llangari does indeed sound messed up. I'm sure many such examples can be found. As can be many examples of situations where the operation of local PD's have been confounded by the actions of ICE and CBP.
A detainer is a non-binding request from immigration to a non-federal police force or prison to hold someone for 48 hours, so they can come and pick that person up.
As has been pointed out numerous times, immigration enforcement IS NOT the responsibility of local police. Further, having local police involved in immigration enforcement makes their work much more complicated in communities where there are a lot of immigrants. By "makes more complicated", I mean it undermines any relationship of trust between the immigrant community and the local police.
Who have to deal with that community, regardless of the immigration status of folks who are in it. This is not a trivial concern. People won't call the cops if they think it could result in their being deported. Especially under the current implementation of ICE/CBP operations, where people are seized and deported EVEN IF THEY HAVE LEGAL STANDING TO BE IN THE COUNTRY.
Happens every day.
So some communities decline to honor detainers. They have other things for their cops to do.
There is a simple solution for ICE / CBP, which is to get a judicial warrant. I'm sure it's a PITA to get a judge to sign off on every person they want to grab, but it provides a basic amount of oversight to their operations, and gives the local PD some guarantee that there actually is a basis for holding the person.
In any case, the idea that MN as a jurisdiction declines to honor detainers "leaves ICE little choice" but to literally invade Minneapolis, assault and shoot people for protesting (see also 1st A), violently break into people's homes without a warrant (see also 4th A), and generally create an environment of utter chaos, seems excessive.
To me.
I suspect other options - other choices - were available to them.
A little more googling got me to the ACLU Minnesota page and there have been several cases where sheriffs have been sued because they extended imprisonment for ICE
"I thought you might be focused on the homicidal crazies"
When the homicidal crazies on one side outnumber those on the other by multiples, yes, I find that worth noting.
They are "outliers" who the current POTUS has described as "beautiful people".
The left brought us the George Floyd riots, after a man was murdered in cold blood by a police officer on video.
The right brought us J6, after their candidate lost a legitimate election. They beat the crap out of Capitol police, leading to the death of some, and literally dropped trou and shit in the Capitol. We came extremely close to an honest-to-god violent autogolpe, at the instigation of the man who currently holds the office of POTUS. We came damned close to the murder of members of Congress.
And all of them were, to a person, subsequently pardoned. Every single one. Regardless of what they had done that day.
Show me anything on the left remotely comparable.
The right brought us the Bundy episode, where a bunch of self-appointed "militia" bros stood down federal officers at gunpoint. And then occupied and thoroughly trashed a public park facility.
Because Bundy didn't want to pay his grazing fees.
The left brought protests against Israel's Gaza invasion.
The right brought us Charlottesville, with bands of punk ass thugs brandishing torches and chanting "Jews will not replace us". And a fine young right wing asshole driving his car into a crowd and killing a young woman. The right brought us the Tree Of Life shooting and the firebombing of Governor Shapiro's home.
The left brought us antifa, whoever the hell they are. The right brought us the KKK (still here), the Order, the Base, Patriot Front, the Oath Keepers, the Proud Boys, and a smattering of explicitly Nazi-aligned groups. The right brought us people holding office and positions of public responsibility who are on record as being "fans of Hitler".
And I'm leaving aside the number of times - the very large number of times - that I've been told that it's only a matter of time before People Like Me are subject to summary execution by the patriots on the right who own all the guns. I've been hearing that for 25 years now. Not from fringe actors, from regular rank and file conservatives. It ain't likely to happen, but it kind of sucks to try to have a conversation with people who apparently can't wait to shoot me.
When "the left" gets out of hand, stuff gets broken. When the right gets out of hand, people get killed.
Hell yeah, the homicidal folks are an issue. And your side has most of them.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.
On “Adam Tooze”
And another one, a Guardian piece on Tooze
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2026/jan/15/the-crisis-whisperer-how-adam-tooze-makes-sense-of-our-bewildering-age
"
Adam Tooze lecture. Rather dense, tossing a raft of references off
https://youtu.be/gLnxzkiB-GI?si=v2Zw4M6Ky6VcuQ1d
"
Don't worry, nous, I remember when McKinney cited Freddie de Boer explaining that this was a guy who understood the left. (though I'm not suggesting you are doing the same with Krugman, it just always comes to mind when I think about who one cites and why)
About the Krugman link, Tooze and Klein both note, with astonishment, that the tariffs on India is higher than the tariffs on China.
A section I didn't highlight but was interested in, was Tooze's comparison with defeating Germany without Russian help to dealing with climate change without the Chinese on board, which was certainly thought provoking.
Fun chinese proverb for y'all
宁为太平犬，不做乱世人
Better to be a dog in times of peace than a human in times of chaos.
"
It seems I am often prefacing links (as I am here) with a mention of how often I disagree with the author on many particulars. Don't take my link to Krugman as an endorsement of Krugman as anything but an observer of this recent deal:
https://paulkrugman.substack.com/p/the-world-files-for-economic-divorce
It's about the free trade agreement just negotiated between the EU and India. I'd have to go back and look over what Krugman says to see if his view is compatible with what Tooze is saying, but I think that the deal itself is very much in line with Tooze's (and Carney's) assertions.
The world is losing faith in the Peace of Westphalia. It will be interesting to see what sort of new order emerges out of that collapse -- assuming that we survive the environmental collapse that is likely to be brought on by all of this lack of a functioning order.
"
I think there is a lot to be said for "a multipolar order, which isn’t a single order but is multiple different orders that are overlapping, very unlike a simple hegemony, more like a mesh " Just for openers, it avoids the risks which are inherent in having a single point of failure.
That, I think, is the lesson of the moment. We had a (relatively) stable world order. With lots of disorder in local areas, but overall stability. But it was based (like it or not, believe it or not) on an implicit assumption that the US, for all its flaws and complicity in local disruptions, would act to keep the overall system stable. But that, whether we recognized it or not, made the US a single point of failure.
Worse, and definitely not recognized by anyone, it turned out the single point of failure was a single individual: whoever happened to be President of the United States. The failing at that one point has been an unfolding disaster, not only for the population of the US, but for the general stability of the world. The collapse has been slower on the international level. But it also looks less reversible.
As an aside, I would point out that the Chinese far prefer stability to chaos (both at home and abroad). They have chafed at America's dominance internationally. But I suspect they are starting to be concerned along the lines of "Be careful what you wish for." Having a loose cannon leading the US is ending the era of American dominance. But the chaos that accompanies the way that is happening....
On “Moral insanity”
Since I have the dashboard open, I'm going to quickly move GftNC's link to a separate post as I think that it is worth considering outside what has been discussed here.
"
Actually, that New Yorker piece is extremely interesting. It chimes with some of the stuff people have talked about here, but there's obviously a lot more detail about the defining characteristics of what has worked and not worked in the past.
On “When will someone take this approach with our administration”
The Kims are essentially god kings (in an officially atheist country).
Their births are accompanied by miracles and the current one was even claimed to be so perfect that he has no digestion.
That idea could be an adoption from something Mao said. He told the story that one day he by chance witnessed his (previously admired) teacher vomiting as the result of too much alcohol and that from then on he despised him. He then declared that the leader must never be associated with something like that, that people had to be indoctrinated to not even be able to imagine their leader having any human weaknesses, so people could not lose respect for him like he himself had.
Well, MAGA world has tendencies in that direction, and the religious part even more so. All images and videos contradicting that must eo ipso be fake. And Sharpie-Gate was just proof that His Orangeness was a better meteorologist than the guys doing it for a living.
"
Most likely, however, someone outside the family gets made regent.
Perhaps Min Tal Lee Il.
"
In North Korea (as opposed to Russia or China) what we basically see is a monarchy in all but name.
That has the general upside, internally, of keeping the succession clear. Assuming that the successor is an adult, as was the case the first two times.
But the downside shows in cases like this where the obvious successor is very young. Perhaps her mother will be regent until she is older. Most likely, however, someone outside the family gets made regent. Which can be problematic.
A lot depends on how long Kim pere keeps going.
On “Moral insanity”
And since I'm posting links, here's one (I don't have a gift button, but let's hope it's viewable) from the New Yorker, called What MAGA Can Teach Democrats About Organising - and Infighting. I haven't read it, but it sounded as if it might (or might not) be of interest to the ObWi commentariat:
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2026/02/02/what-maga-can-teach-democrats-about-organizing-and-infighting
"
lj asked me to post a guest link to this conversation between Ezra Klein and Adam Tooze, headlined How the World Sees America, which I was very happy to do!
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/30/opinion/ezra-klein-podcast-adam-tooze.html?unlocked_article_code=1.IlA.4-M0.6_WnTjSfoDKr&smid=url-share
On “But tell me what you really mean”
Thanks all.
LJ, absolutely no worries. Sorry about the threadjack.
On “Moral insanity”
An observation about left and right antisemitism:
Left-antisemitism arises mostly from anti-Zionism - when an anti-Zionist goes too far in associating Jewish ethnicity with the State of Israel. It can also come from an association of Jews with (unpopular) investment banking. (See also Zhdanov's coded phrase "rootless cosmopolitan".)
Right-antisemitism is quite different. The right is generally sympathetic towards Israel's killing Palestinians, whom it thinks of as browner than Jewish Israelis. But domestically, in the USA, it sees Jews as less American than white gentiles. The extremists are sympathetic to Hitler's ideas about 'Aryanization', denying, or even supporting, the holocaust. But they've got no special objection to Jewish financiers, unless (George Soros) they're openly leftist.
The left tends to see antisemitism from its side as little more than a careless overstepping of boundaries - that's the perspective of Jeremy Corbyn, in the UK. Whereas the right thinks that the only antisemitism that matters is showing insufficient support for Israel.
When commentators on each side speak of antisemitism, there's not that much in common in their meanings.
"
My campus is one of the campuses that had a pro-Palestinian encampment that was taken down with a massive law enforcement action. (I was not there. I had students and colleagues on either side whose perspectives and reasons for their involvement I can sympathize with. It was a complex situation. No one actually involved on either side wanted anyone else on campus to be physically threatened or harmed.)
I'm not going to get into a big post over this because bc has enough to respond to on other lines. I merely note that the public-at-large's understanding and descriptions of what was going on on campuses bear little resemblance to what it was actually like. The media accounts read like mock epics without any of the irony.
The actual drama and foment was tiny right up to the point where the helicopters and riot police showed up in overwhelming numbers and stormed in like they were dealing with a violent mob.
"
I'll leave this dogpile be except to note this
I’m not arguing that at all. I’m simply pointing out that if a particular jurisdiction refuses to cooperate on ICE detainer requests and someone is released, ICE has to go get them. Simple as that. My understanding is that ICE is in the field in Minneapolis more because of the lack of cooperation in Hennepin County.
'Simple as that' does a lot of work here. As I noted, there are a number of factors that contribute to this, so sending 2,000 ICE and CBP agents rather than addressing any of those other factors makes this a disingenuous argument if made by the government, though I don't see it featuring in any of the DHS press releases. I suspect that if they said this, it would be legally actionable in that they are ignoring laws that have been made appropriately in order to get an outcome the DHS would prefer. This is law-breaking, regardless of which side does it.
"
bc: The left has occupied college campuses and aligned with terrorists using violence or threats thereof to intimidate Jewish students. Antisemitism has been mainstreamed.
"Jews will not replace us!" is a well-known chant on The Left, now?
Christianist schizophrenia w.r.t. "Jews" is pathological.
--TP
"
If I have said anything to you, or that would lead anyone here to think I would associate with anything like that, I sincerely apologize.
You didn't, bc. But it strikes me that you have not been exposed to the range of conservative voices that many of us have. It wouldn't be surprising, if so. It's easy to end up living in an information bubble, if one doesn't make an enormous effort not to do so. I see it all the time, and on many ideological sides, including the centrist, left and progressive.
"
bc - That Prairieland Detention Center case is definitely worth some examination. Bondi's people claim that 19 people so far are part of a "North Texas Antifa Cell," and are making much of the five guilty pleas.
Here are two articles about the action and the people who have been charged - from The Guardian and from The New Republic:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/dec/18/texas-antifa-ice-detention-center
https://newrepublic.com/article/204190/texas-antifa-protest-case-doj-free-speech-test
...of the two, I find TNR's article to be better supported and more nuanced, but the Guardian has more personal details about some of the people involved that seem like they are worth consideration.
Just based on what I have read about the case, I'd say that two or three of the people involved were dangerous idiot who might have aspired to being an antifa cell. Another small number were friends who were trying to help an idiot friend who did stupid things in support of them, but who weren't part of any plot at the start, and the majority were protesters who got caught in bad circumstances and exercised poor judgment in not backing out when the idiots started talking big in the encrypted group chat.
Throw the dudes with guns in jail. Treat the vandals like vandals.
As for the rest, I'd need to see a lot more evidence of actual coordination and planning and association before I believed anything that law enforcement said about the majority of the people who showed up.
Thank the gods none of them had a sandwich, or who knows what charges might have been filed?
"
"russell, I am truly shocked that anyone, much less multiple rank and file conservatives, have said anything like that to you."
I appreciate your saying this. Truly.
None of it worries me that much, because nearly all of that has been online, and a lot of folks use the online world to basically vent.
I don't think I've ever run into it here on ObWi. I spent some time on RedState, where it was dead common, and I also hang on Facebook a lot (for my sins), where it is not quite as common, but not uncommon.
I really don't worry about it, it's just an observation. Some people like to talk the big talk.
"
I’ve been hearing that for 25 years now. Not from fringe actors, from regular rank and file conservatives. It ain’t likely to happen, but it kind of sucks to try to have a conversation with people who apparently can’t wait to shoot me.
russell, I am truly shocked that anyone, much less multiple rank and file conservatives, have said anything like that to you. I'm actually dumfounded. I have never, ever heard anything like that directed at me (or anyone I know) and it must be truly painful and troubling to hear. I vehemently reject anyone who says anything like that, conservative or not. If I hadn't read so much of what you have written, and didn't know where your heart is (I do, and it's good), I frankly wouldn't believe you. But I do.
Honestly, I need to step back and let that sink in. It hurts me to hear that. I am so sorry. If I have said anything to you, or that would lead anyone here to think I would associate with anything like that, I sincerely apologize.
"
I would define the specific type of "dog pile" that I see here as follows: any conservative pushing back a bit or pointing out factors others may not have considered gets dumped on him or her not only having to respond to many community members here (which is expected), but also the burden of defending arguments that were never made (or at least were never intended to be made). More curiosity (on my part too) would be helpful.
lj: It’s quite spectacular to see a conservative feel that this process can be blown off when a new president comes in.
I'm not arguing that at all. I'm simply pointing out that if a particular jurisdiction refuses to cooperate on ICE detainer requests and someone is released, ICE has to go get them. Simple as that. My understanding is that ICE is in the field in Minneapolis more because of the lack of cooperation in Hennepin County. Michael Cain raises some good points on cooperation in general, but my understanding is those reasons are not why Hennepin County doesn't honor ICE detainers.
. . .if someone comes to ObWi and posts MAGA and Trump exculpating arguments (eg that the Minneapolis protesters will be largely to blame if as a result of their actions Trump invokes the Insurrection Act) . . .
I didn't argue that. If I was unclear, let me clear that up now. My point was that defunding ICE might give Trump an argument in favor of invoking the Act. I'm not advocating either the defunding or the invocation of the Act at all. Nor am I exculpating anyone. I have commented on how ICE can and should improve. I also think the actions of the protestors have bearing on the issue. If the protestors were just protesting instead of actively, intentionally, and in an organized way obstructing, there would be no argument for invocation of the Act. Is that "blaming" them? I don't think so. I'm just pointing out what they are doing.
wj: Gotcha on the clarification. I understand now.
Judging from the videos of those killings, I’d say a first degree (or whatever the term is in Minnesota) murder charge would be straightforward.
I don't think it is anywhere as straightforward as you might think. I could be wrong. To be clear: I'm not arguing the shootings were justified. What I have seen troubles me greatly. I'll await the full review.
"
"Minneapolis leaves ICE little choice."
Little choice to do what?
The example of Llangari does indeed sound messed up. I'm sure many such examples can be found. As can be many examples of situations where the operation of local PD's have been confounded by the actions of ICE and CBP.
A detainer is a non-binding request from immigration to a non-federal police force or prison to hold someone for 48 hours, so they can come and pick that person up.
As has been pointed out numerous times, immigration enforcement IS NOT the responsibility of local police. Further, having local police involved in immigration enforcement makes their work much more complicated in communities where there are a lot of immigrants. By "makes more complicated", I mean it undermines any relationship of trust between the immigrant community and the local police.
Who have to deal with that community, regardless of the immigration status of folks who are in it. This is not a trivial concern. People won't call the cops if they think it could result in their being deported. Especially under the current implementation of ICE/CBP operations, where people are seized and deported EVEN IF THEY HAVE LEGAL STANDING TO BE IN THE COUNTRY.
Happens every day.
So some communities decline to honor detainers. They have other things for their cops to do.
There is a simple solution for ICE / CBP, which is to get a judicial warrant. I'm sure it's a PITA to get a judge to sign off on every person they want to grab, but it provides a basic amount of oversight to their operations, and gives the local PD some guarantee that there actually is a basis for holding the person.
In any case, the idea that MN as a jurisdiction declines to honor detainers "leaves ICE little choice" but to literally invade Minneapolis, assault and shoot people for protesting (see also 1st A), violently break into people's homes without a warrant (see also 4th A), and generally create an environment of utter chaos, seems excessive.
To me.
I suspect other options - other choices - were available to them.
"
A little more googling got me to the ACLU Minnesota page and there have been several cases where sheriffs have been sued because they extended imprisonment for ICE
https://www.aclu-mn.org/cases/jose-lopez-orellana-v-nobles-county/
https://www.aclu-mn.org/news/aclu-mn-cuts-deportation-pipeline-nobles-county/
https://www.aclu-mn.org/press-releases/jury-finds-anoka-county-jail-committed-false-imprisonment/
This seems more nuanced than bc's description.
"
"I thought you might be focused on the homicidal crazies"
When the homicidal crazies on one side outnumber those on the other by multiples, yes, I find that worth noting.
They are "outliers" who the current POTUS has described as "beautiful people".
The left brought us the George Floyd riots, after a man was murdered in cold blood by a police officer on video.
The right brought us J6, after their candidate lost a legitimate election. They beat the crap out of Capitol police, leading to the death of some, and literally dropped trou and shit in the Capitol. We came extremely close to an honest-to-god violent autogolpe, at the instigation of the man who currently holds the office of POTUS. We came damned close to the murder of members of Congress.
And all of them were, to a person, subsequently pardoned. Every single one. Regardless of what they had done that day.
Show me anything on the left remotely comparable.
The right brought us the Bundy episode, where a bunch of self-appointed "militia" bros stood down federal officers at gunpoint. And then occupied and thoroughly trashed a public park facility.
Because Bundy didn't want to pay his grazing fees.
The left brought protests against Israel's Gaza invasion.
The right brought us Charlottesville, with bands of punk ass thugs brandishing torches and chanting "Jews will not replace us". And a fine young right wing asshole driving his car into a crowd and killing a young woman. The right brought us the Tree Of Life shooting and the firebombing of Governor Shapiro's home.
The left brought us antifa, whoever the hell they are. The right brought us the KKK (still here), the Order, the Base, Patriot Front, the Oath Keepers, the Proud Boys, and a smattering of explicitly Nazi-aligned groups. The right brought us people holding office and positions of public responsibility who are on record as being "fans of Hitler".
And I'm leaving aside the number of times - the very large number of times - that I've been told that it's only a matter of time before People Like Me are subject to summary execution by the patriots on the right who own all the guns. I've been hearing that for 25 years now. Not from fringe actors, from regular rank and file conservatives. It ain't likely to happen, but it kind of sucks to try to have a conversation with people who apparently can't wait to shoot me.
When "the left" gets out of hand, stuff gets broken. When the right gets out of hand, people get killed.
Hell yeah, the homicidal folks are an issue. And your side has most of them.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.