[untitled]
5 comments
Link for when this gets flagged by MAGA: https://www.cato.org/blog/dhs-policy-threatening-arresting-i...
Labeling ICE observers as terrorists is how this administration leverages US Gov's massive NatSec apparatus as an instrument of revenge, against individuals who defy the administration.
In short, the government is showing what happens to individuals who dare to push back against (or just highlight) unconstitutional acts of cruelty.
From the press release:
In short, the government is showing what happens to individuals who dare to push back against (or just highlight) unconstitutional acts of cruelty.
From the press release:
Specifically, the document defines domestic terrorism broadly to
include "doxing" and "impeding" immigration and other law enforcement.
Doxing is not specifically defined, but the memo references calls to
require ICE agents to give their names and operate unmasked.
Individuals who donate to organizations that "impede" or "dox" will be
investigated and deemed to have supported "domestic terrorism."
Therefore, it is crucial to understand that ICE and DHS consider
people who follow DHS and ICE agents to observe, record, or protest
their operations as engaging in "impeding."
People have a right to record law enforcement during their operations
People generally have a right to protest, yell out, insult, swear at,
and even "verbally interrupt" law enforcement during their operations.
People generally have a right to post the names of law enforcement agents,
including undercover agents, unless it is done with a provable intent to
threaten them.
People have a right to generally warn others about the presence of
law enforcement, for example, by holding a sign, honking, flashing lights,
or livestreaming.
Honking can only be limited through a content-neutral, traffic-safety
statute, which does not exist under federal law.
People may not be arrested or detained, even for real technical traffic
violations, if the officers are motivated by a desire to retaliate against
their speech and the arrest or detention would not have otherwise been made.If the stories be true, Gödel wasn't exactly convinced of the efficacy of the constitution?
He knew about the section of the constitution that allows the Congress to be suspended by the President "until the time he sees fit". Most people don't know that is in there, and it's never been done in the history of the US. Godel was very much into logic and rules, including the Constitution he read for his citizenship exam. He didn't understand, however, political realities.
Which section would that be?