US 2024 Presidential Election

[The Rogue Wolf]

I'm glad this guy. It shows the coward he is and got his butt kicked.

What we know about Anthony Kazmierczak after man arrested for attack on Ilhan Omar

Ilhan Omar declaring that ‘these f***ing ***holes’ were not going to get away with the attack

www.the-independent.com

And, of course, a Republican is blaming her for being attacked.

Republican Blames Ilhan Omar For Own Assault After She Was Attacked At Town Hall

"I want Ilhan Omar to be deported and denaturalized, but I don't want her to be attacked or hurt,” Rep. Randy Fine (R-Fla.) prefaced before blaming the congresswoman for being attacked.

www.yahoo.com

"We only keep attacking you because you keep making us want to attack you, so really, it's your fault."

 

[thebobmaster]

And that's when we don't have the president claiming Ilhan Omar orchestrated the attack on herself.

 

[hanselthecaretaker2]

The left has double standards, the left doesn't want to enforce immigration laws

It’s only a problem when Trump does it, because he’s always been an outsider aka not part of the establishment/political elite.

Protesting inherently makes the environment more prone to violence.

About that -

 

[Dirty Hipsters]

I was responding to Tippy saying ICE is operating under the same rules as they always have, then you responded with this:


ICE is operating under the same rules as they've always had and now you are all protesting it (before any deaths). Guess what ICE wasn't dealing with under Obama or Trump's first term, constant protesting/protestors. Protesting inherently makes the environment more prone to violence.

And again that's absolute horseshit, and we know that's horseshit because of the internal ICE memos that have been leaked showing how their operating procedures have changed (often to things that are unconstitutional/illegal).

For example, the memo telling ICE agents that they can enter people's homes to arrest them without a judicial warrant, which is illegal and directly contravenes the 4th amendment, and which a judge has already told them is illegal.

Immigration officers assert sweeping power to enter homes without a judge's warrant, memo says

An Immigration and Customs Enforcement memo obtained by The Associated Press reveals that the agency allows immigration officers to forcibly enter homes to make arrests without a judicial warrant.

apnews.com

US Judge Rules ICE Raids Require Judicial Warrants, Contradicting Secret ICE Memo

The ruling in federal court in Minnesota lands as Immigration and Customs Enforcement faces scrutiny over an internal memo claiming judge-signed warrants aren’t needed to enter homes without consent.

www.wired.com

Edit:



Judge Patrick Schiltz:

"ICE has likely violated more court orders in January 2026 than some federal agencies have violated in their entire existence."

Directly from page 2 of this order

"Attached to this order is an appendix that identifies 96 court order that ICE has violated in 74 cases. The extent of ICE's noncompliance is almost certainly substantially understated. This list is confined to orders issues since January 1, 2026, and the list was hurriedly compiled by extraordinarily busy judges."

TROrder012826

www.documentcloud.org

Yup, sounds like totally normal and routine operation by a federal agency following all the same rules it's always followed.

 

[Seanchaidh]

Yup, sounds like totally normal and routine operation by a federal agency following all the same rules it's always followed.

Be that as it may, it is worth keeping in mind that ICE has been an abomination since its founding. These are matters of degree, not kind.

 

[Silvanus]

It’s only a problem when Trump does it

Please provide past examples of ICE executing American citizens in the street and then receiving unconditional statements of support or promises of immunity from the government. Or the government mass deporting people who never broke immigration rules or laws to a foreign prison.

because he’s always been an outsider aka not part of the establishment/political elite.

Sure, the billionaire with the unquestioning support of the party in charge of all branches of government is an "outsider". Good lord.

 

[bluegate]

Or shit like this;

Reddit - Please wait for verification

www.reddit.com

 

[Agema]

Taxes offsetting other taxes sounds perfectly plain to me. I don't know why new tariffs are chaos but cutting income taxes is racking up debt, though. Seems rhetorically imbalanced.

Cutting taxes inherently decreases government revenue compared to spending. It's just a mathematical reality. It is possible tax cuts can in the long-term drive economic growth that increase revenue, but this is controversial in theory and not always observed in practice.

Tariffs are not intrinsically chaos, but the Trump administration has handled them chaotically: unpredictable, huge differences in values, on one day and off the next. This seriously disrupts business plans and causes costs and inefficiencies.

 

[Hades]

It’s only a problem when Trump does it, because he’s always been an outsider aka not part of the establishment/political elite.

Hold your horses there. Trump has never been an outsider. As an openly corrupt businessman he has always been part of America’s ruling class

 

[tstorm823]

Tariffs are not intrinsically chaos, but the Trump administration has handled them chaotically: unpredictable, huge differences in values, on one day and off the next. This seriously disrupts business plans and causes costs and inefficiencies.

And funds the government. Or at least about 5% of it.

Hold your horses there. Trump has never been an outsider. As an openly corrupt businessman he has always been part of America’s ruling class

I mostly agree with this historically, but he definitely walked out on that ruling class before becoming president. They're definitely not inviting him to the same parties anymore.

It’s only a problem when Trump does it, because he’s always been an outsider aka not part of the establishment/political elite.

Conceptually correct, but I don't think either of those numbers are accurate.

 

[Hades]

I mostly agree with this historically, but he definitely walked out on that ruling class before becoming president. They're definitely not inviting him to the same parties anymore.

I wouldnt say so. He ruled exactly as an openly corrupt bussinessman would, with plenty upper class hobbies, and the very open stance that those with the biggest pockets were always welcome to come bribe him. Taken to bigger extreme in his second term where he was palling around with the literal richest man alive.

 

[Seanchaidh]

And funds the government. Or at least about 5% of it.

the Federal government is not funded by taxes (including tariffs). the debt ceiling, the requirement to offset deficits by issuing debt, and even keeping track of the balance between taxes collected and spending budgeted is entirely self-imposed by statute: the Federal government cannot run out of money, it can only refuse to create more. taxes and tariffs take money out of circulation, and the requirement to pay taxes in some currency gives that currency a reason to have value (though not necessarily the only reason). theoretically taking money out of circulation has an effect on inflation, but that effect is related to the balance of money supply vs. goods and services available in the entire economy rather than the bookkeeping of the Federal government and is also affected by things like interest rates.

American states, territories, and protectorates do actually collect taxes to fund their spending, as do other states that do not control their own currency, like those of the Eurozone, though of course they can also take out loans.

They're definitely not inviting him to the same parties anymore.

A large part of that is because Jeffery Epstein is no longer able to host them. His imprisonment and death disrupted the routines of a lot of "very important people".

 

[tstorm823]

I wouldnt say so. He ruled exactly as an openly corrupt bussinessman would, with plenty upper class hobbies, and the very open stance that those with the biggest pockets were always welcome to come bribe him. Taken to bigger extreme in his second term where he was palling around with the literal richest man alive.

A lifestyle does not make one an insider.

theoretically taking money out of circulation has an effect on inflation, but that effect is related to the balance of money supply vs. goods and services available in the entire economy rather than the bookkeeping of the Federal government and is also affected by things like interest rates.

It's not theoretically, it's an obvious mathematical truth, and even should you not be able to see it in the abstract, how many nations have to tank their currencies to nothing by wildly outspending what they tax for you to accept the practical impact?

If you make no attempt at balance to the ins and outs of the money supply, your money is worthless, and then your government cannot pay for anything regardless of how much more they make.

A large part of that is because Jeffery Epstein is no longer able to host them. His imprisonment and death disrupted the routines of a lot of "very important people".

So influential people only congregate for pedophilia? I can only assume you think they were coordinating these parties through local pizza shops, right?

 

[Hades]

A lifestyle does not make one an insider.

More a style of governance and bussiness. Trump's personal preferences in his private lifestyle might be the only thing about him that's not elite since he has no class.

 

[Seanchaidh]

So influential people only congregate for pedophilia? I can only assume you think they were coordinating these parties through local pizza shops, right?

?

Jeffery Epstein threw a lot of parties. Seems doubtful they were all for child rape, but I don't know. Why would they need to be coordinating them in any special way? Just send the invites.

It's not theoretically, it's an obvious mathematical truth,

absolutely not. money supply is an inherently fuzzy concept, which is why we have terms like M1, M2, and so on, which themselves don't really capture everything relevant about the relationship between money supply and inflation. if you just sit on money, it's not doing anything to inflation. the only way money supply has an effect on inflation is if people are significantly bidding up the price of goods and services because they have more money. which they can, but they definitely do not have to do.

and even should you not be able to see it in the abstract, how many nations have to tank their currencies to nothing by wildly outspending what they tax for you to accept the practical impact?

but it's not because they "wildly outspend what they tax". It's because they wildly increase the money supply beyond what can be bought with it. the idea that governments with their own sovereign currencies and debts denominated in their own currency need to balance their own spending against specifically taxation is laughable nonsense. the majority of the world is a counterexample at any given time, and the parts that aren't a counterexample don't have sovereign currencies.

hyperinflations only tend to happen when a government is paying off a debt that is denominated in a currency that isn't its own. If, e.g. the Weimar republic had only to pay its reparations in units of its own currency, there wouldn't have been the hyperinflations that it suffered through (deliberately, I might add).

 

[Thaluikhain]

Trump's personal preferences in his private lifestyle might be the only thing about him that's not elite since he has no class.

Is that that unusual in "the elite", though? Perhaps not stereotypically old money, but not sure how true the stereotype actually is.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

But is that the case? Illegal migration has existed for decades and while its never particularly liked it does have its alleged uses. Firstly because the work they do is work that the home grown population by and large doesn't want to do, and because they can be squized absolutely dry, and big business can rake in the profits which certain parties always insisted trickled down.

Not that I think its a net positive. The society disruption is more costly than whatever work they do. But that disruption too is largely the creation of the far right. And are we not long in a situation where the medicine is far more harmful than the alleged illness? Is migration really so important that a state should be held under complete siege about it? Is it so important that practically all other matters should be put secondary to it as in my own country? Is it so bad that children should be put in torture prisons? And is dealing with migration so important that we should let complete amateurs and freaks hijack the government just because they're the loudest voice on the issue?

The world is practically on fire right now, but even before that its just hard to imagine some brown people working for peanuts ever genuinely being a country's top priority. All that time, effort and money spend on this shit could be spend far more productively.

I can't help but think of a certain quote from the Donald in his debate with Biden ''Who build those cages, Joe?'' The answer to this was of course Obama and it was meant as a gotcha. Sometimes its also asked why Obama and Biden didn't get flack for their deportation numbers. So the idea that the left simply doesn't want to enforce migration laws might not genuinely exist within the right beyond the talking point that anything short of extreme fanaticism is ''not doing anything about migration''

Obama and Biden met their deportation numbers plenty. They just weren't obsessed freaks about it.

Not that there will ever be 0 illegal immigrants but you can't actively just allow it like what happened under Biden. There are programs that allow for migrants to come over and work like for migrant farmers. We did have arguably the biggest influx of immigrants during the Biden administration in the entire history of the US, and that is not based on just a number count, it is based on percentage. I forget if it was higher than the surge in the 1850s or just under it and since it is based on a percentage vs just number count, it's not just because there's more people now than in 1850. That's how much of an immigration influx that happened under BIden and it's not just the right making shit up. 90+% of Americans don't want that. The left keeps losing because they keep being for issues that 80+% of people are against and the left just keeps telling people they are wrong or racist or dumb, this isn't a strategy that gets people to vote for you. I wonder why Trump did better in literally every single district in the US than he did in 2020, it's not rocket science.

The world is arguably the best it's ever been for humanity. It is the best time to be alive than in any other time in human history. Maybe you could argue 10 years ago or 30 years ago was a bit better. But this time period overall is easily the best it's ever been for humans. My parents grew up without having some things we consider basic conveniences today. There was just recently a generation that went through 2 world wars, the Spanish flu (far far far far far worse than covid), a great depression (far far far far worse than 2008), and a cold war. And then before that generation I just mentioned, humans didn't even have something as basic as running water (and of course all the constant wars). So, how is the world so horrible to be alive in when you compare it to any other time in human history?

Immigration until Biden wasn't really an issue that the 2 parties disagreed on, they'd talk about it here and there for political points but it was mainly hot air. Left cities actively not cooperating with ICE wasn't happening until very recently.

About that -

Pretti just like Rittenhouse has a right to be there and be armed. When people were asking why Rittenhouse was even there was a dumb question to ask because it wasn't pertinent to the case. That also showed their hypocrisy because when you have someone asking that very question for a gang shooting at like 2am (and why the kid wasn't home) are accused of being racist. But saying that of a white kid isn't racist? Anyway, getting back to being at a protest and having a gun; going to a protest increases your odds of being in some kind of violent situation and bringing a gun there increases it even more. Neither of those will affect the case when there is a shooting and it will come down to whether you were defending yourself in Rittenhouse's case or whether law enforcement had a valid reason to shoot (defending themselves) in Pretti's case. We know very little of what actually happened in the Pretti case (because it will all be in the little details that you can't really see in the video) but it does look pretty bad. Although something as basic as the agent disarming Pretti and communicating that he found a gun and disarmed Pretti may have not been heard completely because of all the noise (and constant whistling) and agents hearing "gun" but not the disarm part, Pretti reaching for something, and then them reacting. Not too unlike a road football team on offense trying to communicate their plays in a loud stadium. Regardless if that happened or not, it is something that could happen in a situation like that, and that is why going to a protest is inherently dangerous.

I protest by doing things I think actually matter like voting the current parties out or not buying stuff from bad business like Amazon (I knew what Amazon was doing decade(s) ago and refuse to buy anything from them unless it's like the only place that has something). Or if you don't want your neighborhood full of fast food and junk food places, buy and eat real food, don't go to McDonald's or Popeyes or Sharks. The businesses that stay open and the businesses that end up closing/leaving are a reflection of you and your community, you have the power to control these things. People don't stick to their principles, let stuff snowball, and then get mad when it does snowball, stand on corners with signs acting like they are actually doing something and actually care.

And again that's absolute horseshit, and we know that's horseshit because of the internal ICE memos that have been leaked showing how their operating procedures have changed (often to things that are unconstitutional/illegal).

For example, the memo telling ICE agents that they can enter people's homes to arrest them without a judicial warrant, which is illegal and directly contravenes the 4th amendment, and which a judge has already told them is illegal.

Immigration officers assert sweeping power to enter homes without a judge's warrant, memo says

An Immigration and Customs Enforcement memo obtained by The Associated Press reveals that the agency allows immigration officers to forcibly enter homes to make arrests without a judicial warrant.

apnews.com

US Judge Rules ICE Raids Require Judicial Warrants, Contradicting Secret ICE Memo

The ruling in federal court in Minnesota lands as Immigration and Customs Enforcement faces scrutiny over an internal memo claiming judge-signed warrants aren’t needed to enter homes without consent.

www.wired.com

Edit:

View attachment 14202

Judge Patrick Schiltz:

"ICE has likely violated more court orders in January 2026 than some federal agencies have violated in their entire existence."

Directly from page 2 of this order

"Attached to this order is an appendix that identifies 96 court order that ICE has violated in 74 cases. The extent of ICE's noncompliance is almost certainly substantially understated. This list is confined to orders issues since January 1, 2026, and the list was hurriedly compiled by extraordinarily busy judges."

TROrder012826

www.documentcloud.org

Yup, sounds like totally normal and routine operation by a federal agency following all the same rules it's always followed.

Again, I said that BEFORE that memo and before that was known. And the protests all started long before any of this. That is what I'm commenting on, why protest when ICE was acting the same as it ever has?

 

[Agema]

And funds the government. Or at least about 5% of it.

Sure, tariffs are not intrinsically bad. The government needs money to do stuff, and why not tariffs to get some?

But like any tax, they dissuade people from what gets taxed so tend to be a problem when too high. Trade works between countries for the same sorts of reasons it exists between people: some are better at making certain stuff than others. High tariffs mean your people can't get the good stuff other countries make and don't make money selling their good stuff to other countries.

Whether Trump's tariffs have worked for revenue generation is also questionable. Reason being that they have in many cases incited costs or retaliatory action which have hurt US producers. Therefore, tariffs have increased costs for its people with the revenue then lost compensating businesses losses.

The sort of things tariffs can do is work as part of a wider trade and industrial strategy to protect or nurture industries deemed important. Tariffs can defend against other harmful practices like overproducing and dumping. And they can act as a weapon: this could be a form of sanctions against a hostile country. It can also be as Trump, just trying to mug other countries: "I'm going to hurt you unless you pay us tribute". In the short term, you might be able to gouge benefits. In the long term, every country on the receiving end moves to defend themselves because no-one likes being mugged. In the long-term, the USA is doomed to lose allies and trade.

 

[The Rogue Wolf]

I bet this guy thought he'd be getting a huge boner bonus for nabbing all these non-Americans.

https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/ecuador-says-ice-agent-tried-enter-consulate-minneapolis-2026-01-28/

 

[tstorm823]

if you just sit on money, it's not doing anything to inflation.

If everyone sits on money, it absolutely does.