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.
2026-01-31 00:27:35
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.
2026-01-30 22:35:11
lj:
Thanks for recognizing the "dog pile" phenomena. I think I answered the choice of Minneapolis (vs. Minnesota writ large). And I suspect it being in Gov. Walz' back yard was a plus for Trump.
nous:
I lot there. I didn't ignore it. I'm not convinced Antifa has as little involvement as you say. I note that Antifa has targeted ICE:
I also think these protests are more astroturfed than you allow. There is some interesting info out there on funding. Time will tell.
2026-01-30 22:26:16
russell:
Basically, the predominance of the right wing in US political violence is a pretty well-established fact.
I thought you might be focusing on the homicidal crazies. IMO, you paint with way to broad a brush. While I acknowledge the point, they are outliers. The right roundly condemned Timothy McVeigh, for example. The crazies do not enjoy widespread support by either left or right. I almost put all of them in the same basket and I think it does a disservice to attribute the nut jobs and terrorists to the mainstream left or right.
The left commits far more assaults, property damage, riots more, etc in the name of political issues. Protests leaning into riot/violence is a familiar pattern since 2020. In addition, the left has blocked access to conservative speakers at college, often resorting to intimidation or violence. The left has occupied college campuses and aligned with terrorists using violence or threats thereof to intimidate Jewish students. Antisemitism has been mainstreamed. The cheers from mainstreamers on the left following the Trump assassination attempts and the Charlie Kirk shooting are troubling.
The right is far from perfect, but I note the pushback to, for example, Carlson’s interview with Fuentes and Kevin Roberts’ defense of that. We know we have some problems and are pushing back against it. Maybe I’m just not privy to the same thing happening on the left?
Hsh: It’s interesting that under the Obama administration there were so many deportations . . .
I think it is as simple as he’s a Democrat and his predecessor didn’t let in 10-20 million illegal immigrants in 4 years. Obama had more cooperation with local law enforcement. I agree that it is very interesting. Obama did some fancy foot work on the statistic, though, reporting turnaways at the border as deportations to look tougher that he was. The exact same guy in Minnesota running things now was decorated under Obama (Tom Homan). While the ALCU complained that the border patrol was “monstruous” under Obama and there were some protests, I think the pushback was muted simply because he was on the same team.
Not getting involved isn’t the same as obstructing (or even merely objecting).
True, but this isn’t going to the beach. If someone is subject to deportation and has a dangerous criminal record, why would an agency pledged to keeping the public safe not want that person removed? I do understand some petty crimes not being passed on. But I simply don’t get the more serious ones. Without cooperation, ICE has to go find the person. And it’s pretty hard to do that with what I’m seeing.
2026-01-30 21:24:05
wjca:
Seriously? I doubt you will find a single official, in any sanctuary city or county or state, who would have any problem at all at all with those convicted of serious crimes being picked up and deported.
I am at a loss here. This is a central issue. Minnesota DOC (state prisons) was cooperating and honoring ICE detainers once a criminal’s sentence is done. Some counties and cities (e.g. Hennepin County and Minneapolis) were not. They release them into the public sphere rather than cooperate. Now the AG (Keith Ellison) doubled down, issuing an opinion that honoring detainers violates Minnesota law, even when there is an agreement with the feds (287(g) agreements). I’m not clear if the DOC’s cooperation will continue. If I’m wrong, I’m all ears. But Hennepin County ignored 2,000 detainers since Trump took office:
The issue isn’t just convicted. Those that have been arrested are a problem too. I get that a city, county or state would want to see justice for the victims and prosecute illegal aliens who commit serious crimes. But there is no good reason an illegal alien credibly accused of serious crimes should be let loose without coordination with the feds, IMO. Look at German Llangari, the illegal alien that killed Victoria Harwell in the twin cities (vehicular homicide). ICE issued a detainer and Minneapolis released him twice, ignoring the detainer. He was a fugitive after the first release. ICE had to track him down without cooperation and did so and deported him. If Minneapolis would cooperate, Minneapolis could have had its conviction, Llangari would have paid his price, and then he would have been deported. Minneapolis leaves ICE little choice.
** Far more than the number (citizens and non-citizens alike) who have simply been murdered.
I don’t know if anyone can be “simply murdered.” And your comment implies some sort of comparison between a citizen being wrongfully detained by ICE and a citizen being murdered by an illegal alien. I reject that. Both are bad, but murder is beyond horrible.
I read Pro Publica’s article on citizen detention/arrest several months ago. I just glanced at it again. More than 170 detentions of citizens, 20 for more than a day in 2025. ICE arrested something like 350,000 in 2025. It’s not clear if the 150 detained were detained for any length of time. I assume that the bulk were detained during protests that went too far (e.g. laying hands on officers or throwing rocks at them). I think there have been 26 confirmed murders of citizens or legal residents by illegal aliens if we are going to compare. I looked at several of the citizen detentions back then (the time of the article) and I found, again, situations that were not black and white. The most sympathetic (to me) was the young vet, George Retes. Likeable guy. Security guard at a marijuana farm. I saw the video. He drove right up to a line of ICE officers on the highway right when they were about to take action against a group of protesters who were obstructing them. I think I believe George that he was late to work, but be late and drive around! George was not reasonable driving right up to them and expecting ICE officers to call time out in a volatile situation to address his need to get to work on time. I do have an issue with the lack of phone call and 3-day detention, however. Obviously.
2026-01-29 20:36:42
russell: I appreciate your response. Sorry for my delayed response (day job). I find myself aligned with your manifesto. Thanks for sharing.
I understood "freaks" to refer to the rank and file, not their leaders. I see I was wrong. I shouldn't assume. I understand calling political figures freaks, simply because they are public targets. They signed up for it.
My view on ICE is tempered by what ICE is dealing with in the streets.
I find the organized and calculated obstruction tactics coupled with the apparent involvement of socialist organizations and other far left groups (and maybe even local politicians) troubling because it tends to indicate there is much more going on here than opposition to immigration policy. The violence from the "protestors" is intended, IMO, to provoke. Yes, ICE shouldn't take the bait and they sometimes do and that is a problem. I see the "protests" at least in part a continuation of the Antifa-led protests in 2020 that really weren’t much about George Floyd after the first several days. I don’t share your view on the balance of violence in the past years, and curious why you see it that way.
Tony P.: I have issues with the 4th Amendment violations, quotas, etc. The shootings are tragic. The organized obstruction and doxxing makes a dangerous job that much harder. That’s why I don’t see things as black and white. I have no problem with protest. This is beyond protest for the most part.
How to improve? I’d make body cameras and badge numbers mandatory for accountability purposes for starters. There are some situations where going undercover or safety mandate something else, but make it the exception. And more de-escalation training. My overall impression is that what I see appears less professional in a lot of situations than what I see with well-trained police forces, but I’m seeing it through the lens of protestors actively obstructing. ICE’s mission isn’t really crowd control (and it shows). Contrast that with the Maple Grove PD’s response when the rioters went after Greg Bovino’s hotel. But note how many officers it took to control those protestors.
I would also encourage local cooperation, something that has been actively discouraged by Walz and Frey. St. Paul Police Fed. Pres. Mark Ross called for local cooperation, even claiming it would have prevented the shooting deaths: https://nypost.com/2026/01/28/us-news/police-union-head-slams-minn-as-gov-walz-agrees-to-have-top-cop-work-with-border-czar/
2026-01-27 18:27:07
wjca:
What do you see being accomplished by giving Trump what he asks for?
My point is that by defunding ICE, you do give Trump what I think (I'm doing a bit of mind reading here) you fear: that he will militarize the response. Insurrection Act, Alien Enemies Act, etc. Without ICE, you'd have to take agents from the border and there is a limit to that. Defund DHS completely, you lose the Border Patrol (and TSA and the Secret Service too). Trump, OTOH, is still Commander in Chief. He can call up the guard or maybe even the Arctic Angels.
Trump wants state and local cooperation in rounding up the illegal aliens, especially those convicted or charged with serious crimes. Sanctuary cities/counties/states are actively resisting the enforcement of federal law. Those that think the obstruction isn't part of and the cause of much of the violence (and intentionally so) are naive IMO.
Take the resistance far enough and what you end up with may not what you bargained for. Or maybe some are bargaining for that response in search of the revolution.
2026-01-27 18:14:20
russell:
You’re a conservative, get your freaking Congress people to stop giving these freaks the space to destroy this country.
And this is where we part company on this issue. Dehumanizing either side gets us nowhere. I don't see the situation as black and white as you do.
2026-01-27 05:33:03
lj: my bad. I meant to put a divider there. Still, I thought (and think) the context is obvious and I wasn't being disrespectful. I will use my best MLA/Bluebook from here on out.
2026-01-27 00:26:24
So it’s a chance (whether large or tiny) of accomplishing something vs no chance at all. Easy choice.
But do it anyway. Do whatever is available.
That is asking Trump to deploy the military for immigration enforcement without actually asking him, IMO. Or is that the point? Push escalation until the revolution?
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.
lj:
Thanks for recognizing the "dog pile" phenomena. I think I answered the choice of Minneapolis (vs. Minnesota writ large). And I suspect it being in Gov. Walz' back yard was a plus for Trump.
nous:
I lot there. I didn't ignore it. I'm not convinced Antifa has as little involvement as you say. I note that Antifa has targeted ICE:
https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndtx/pr/antifa-cell-members-indicted-prairieland-shooting
I also think these protests are more astroturfed than you allow. There is some interesting info out there on funding. Time will tell.
russell:
Basically, the predominance of the right wing in US political violence is a pretty well-established fact.
I thought you might be focusing on the homicidal crazies. IMO, you paint with way to broad a brush. While I acknowledge the point, they are outliers. The right roundly condemned Timothy McVeigh, for example. The crazies do not enjoy widespread support by either left or right. I almost put all of them in the same basket and I think it does a disservice to attribute the nut jobs and terrorists to the mainstream left or right.
The left commits far more assaults, property damage, riots more, etc in the name of political issues. Protests leaning into riot/violence is a familiar pattern since 2020. In addition, the left has blocked access to conservative speakers at college, often resorting to intimidation or violence. The left has occupied college campuses and aligned with terrorists using violence or threats thereof to intimidate Jewish students. Antisemitism has been mainstreamed. The cheers from mainstreamers on the left following the Trump assassination attempts and the Charlie Kirk shooting are troubling.
The right is far from perfect, but I note the pushback to, for example, Carlson’s interview with Fuentes and Kevin Roberts’ defense of that. We know we have some problems and are pushing back against it. Maybe I’m just not privy to the same thing happening on the left?
Hsh: It’s interesting that under the Obama administration there were so many deportations . . .
I think it is as simple as he’s a Democrat and his predecessor didn’t let in 10-20 million illegal immigrants in 4 years. Obama had more cooperation with local law enforcement. I agree that it is very interesting. Obama did some fancy foot work on the statistic, though, reporting turnaways at the border as deportations to look tougher that he was. The exact same guy in Minnesota running things now was decorated under Obama (Tom Homan). While the ALCU complained that the border patrol was “monstruous” under Obama and there were some protests, I think the pushback was muted simply because he was on the same team.
Not getting involved isn’t the same as obstructing (or even merely objecting).
True, but this isn’t going to the beach. If someone is subject to deportation and has a dangerous criminal record, why would an agency pledged to keeping the public safe not want that person removed? I do understand some petty crimes not being passed on. But I simply don’t get the more serious ones. Without cooperation, ICE has to go find the person. And it’s pretty hard to do that with what I’m seeing.
wjca:
Seriously? I doubt you will find a single official, in any sanctuary city or county or state, who would have any problem at all at all with those convicted of serious crimes being picked up and deported.
I am at a loss here. This is a central issue. Minnesota DOC (state prisons) was cooperating and honoring ICE detainers once a criminal’s sentence is done. Some counties and cities (e.g. Hennepin County and Minneapolis) were not. They release them into the public sphere rather than cooperate. Now the AG (Keith Ellison) doubled down, issuing an opinion that honoring detainers violates Minnesota law, even when there is an agreement with the feds (287(g) agreements). I’m not clear if the DOC’s cooperation will continue. If I’m wrong, I’m all ears. But Hennepin County ignored 2,000 detainers since Trump took office:
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/29/us/minnesota-ice-jails-immigration-arrests.html
The issue isn’t just convicted. Those that have been arrested are a problem too. I get that a city, county or state would want to see justice for the victims and prosecute illegal aliens who commit serious crimes. But there is no good reason an illegal alien credibly accused of serious crimes should be let loose without coordination with the feds, IMO. Look at German Llangari, the illegal alien that killed Victoria Harwell in the twin cities (vehicular homicide). ICE issued a detainer and Minneapolis released him twice, ignoring the detainer. He was a fugitive after the first release. ICE had to track him down without cooperation and did so and deported him. If Minneapolis would cooperate, Minneapolis could have had its conviction, Llangari would have paid his price, and then he would have been deported. Minneapolis leaves ICE little choice.
** Far more than the number (citizens and non-citizens alike) who have simply been murdered.
I don’t know if anyone can be “simply murdered.” And your comment implies some sort of comparison between a citizen being wrongfully detained by ICE and a citizen being murdered by an illegal alien. I reject that. Both are bad, but murder is beyond horrible.
I read Pro Publica’s article on citizen detention/arrest several months ago. I just glanced at it again. More than 170 detentions of citizens, 20 for more than a day in 2025. ICE arrested something like 350,000 in 2025. It’s not clear if the 150 detained were detained for any length of time. I assume that the bulk were detained during protests that went too far (e.g. laying hands on officers or throwing rocks at them). I think there have been 26 confirmed murders of citizens or legal residents by illegal aliens if we are going to compare. I looked at several of the citizen detentions back then (the time of the article) and I found, again, situations that were not black and white. The most sympathetic (to me) was the young vet, George Retes. Likeable guy. Security guard at a marijuana farm. I saw the video. He drove right up to a line of ICE officers on the highway right when they were about to take action against a group of protesters who were obstructing them. I think I believe George that he was late to work, but be late and drive around! George was not reasonable driving right up to them and expecting ICE officers to call time out in a volatile situation to address his need to get to work on time. I do have an issue with the lack of phone call and 3-day detention, however. Obviously.
russell: I appreciate your response. Sorry for my delayed response (day job). I find myself aligned with your manifesto. Thanks for sharing.
I understood "freaks" to refer to the rank and file, not their leaders. I see I was wrong. I shouldn't assume. I understand calling political figures freaks, simply because they are public targets. They signed up for it.
My view on ICE is tempered by what ICE is dealing with in the streets.
I find the organized and calculated obstruction tactics coupled with the apparent involvement of socialist organizations and other far left groups (and maybe even local politicians) troubling because it tends to indicate there is much more going on here than opposition to immigration policy. The violence from the "protestors" is intended, IMO, to provoke. Yes, ICE shouldn't take the bait and they sometimes do and that is a problem. I see the "protests" at least in part a continuation of the Antifa-led protests in 2020 that really weren’t much about George Floyd after the first several days. I don’t share your view on the balance of violence in the past years, and curious why you see it that way.
Tony P.: I have issues with the 4th Amendment violations, quotas, etc. The shootings are tragic. The organized obstruction and doxxing makes a dangerous job that much harder. That’s why I don’t see things as black and white. I have no problem with protest. This is beyond protest for the most part.
How to improve? I’d make body cameras and badge numbers mandatory for accountability purposes for starters. There are some situations where going undercover or safety mandate something else, but make it the exception. And more de-escalation training. My overall impression is that what I see appears less professional in a lot of situations than what I see with well-trained police forces, but I’m seeing it through the lens of protestors actively obstructing. ICE’s mission isn’t really crowd control (and it shows). Contrast that with the Maple Grove PD’s response when the rioters went after Greg Bovino’s hotel. But note how many officers it took to control those protestors.
I would also encourage local cooperation, something that has been actively discouraged by Walz and Frey. St. Paul Police Fed. Pres. Mark Ross called for local cooperation, even claiming it would have prevented the shooting deaths: https://nypost.com/2026/01/28/us-news/police-union-head-slams-minn-as-gov-walz-agrees-to-have-top-cop-work-with-border-czar/
wjca:
What do you see being accomplished by giving Trump what he asks for?
My point is that by defunding ICE, you do give Trump what I think (I'm doing a bit of mind reading here) you fear: that he will militarize the response. Insurrection Act, Alien Enemies Act, etc. Without ICE, you'd have to take agents from the border and there is a limit to that. Defund DHS completely, you lose the Border Patrol (and TSA and the Secret Service too). Trump, OTOH, is still Commander in Chief. He can call up the guard or maybe even the Arctic Angels.
Trump wants state and local cooperation in rounding up the illegal aliens, especially those convicted or charged with serious crimes. Sanctuary cities/counties/states are actively resisting the enforcement of federal law. Those that think the obstruction isn't part of and the cause of much of the violence (and intentionally so) are naive IMO.
Take the resistance far enough and what you end up with may not what you bargained for. Or maybe some are bargaining for that response in search of the revolution.
russell:
You’re a conservative, get your freaking Congress people to stop giving these freaks the space to destroy this country.
And this is where we part company on this issue. Dehumanizing either side gets us nowhere. I don't see the situation as black and white as you do.
lj: my bad. I meant to put a divider there. Still, I thought (and think) the context is obvious and I wasn't being disrespectful. I will use my best MLA/Bluebook from here on out.
So it’s a chance (whether large or tiny) of accomplishing something vs no chance at all. Easy choice.
But do it anyway. Do whatever is available.
That is asking Trump to deploy the military for immigration enforcement without actually asking him, IMO. Or is that the point? Push escalation until the revolution?