Daily Mail: Kristi Noem's ICE hiring chaos laid bare as fat, illiterate and violent misfits 'not ready to tie their own laces' are recruited

iluvatar5150 said:

Why? Because that’s not how resource allocation works.

If you have 100 officers and you tell them to focus on “the worst of the worst,” then that’s what they’re going to do. But if, instead, you give them quotas, then they’re going to grab the easiest targets, i.e. the people who aren’t in hiding because they haven’t committed any other crimes. <100 guys are going to be catching the worst.

IOW, with the current staffing, they would be getting more bad guys without the quotas.

Click to expand...

However that is not their job. Their job is not to just go after the worst of the worst. Its to pick up all the illegals. Getting rhe worst is good and in the process of doing so, they have also found other illegals as well. No where in their mission or the laws are they limited to the worst. They are still focused on that, but they have not abandoned the rest of rheir mission. Nor should they.

Thats why they are getting more agents. So they can do it all more efficiently. Now you can criticize their training, I have no problem with that.

rjs330 said:

However that is not their job. Their job is not to just go after the worst of the worst. Its to pick up all the illegals. Getting rhe worst is good and in the process of doing so, they have also found other illegals as well. No where in their mission or the laws are they limited to the worst. They are still focused on that, but they have not abandoned the rest of rheir mission. Nor should they.

Thats why they are getting more agents. So they can do it all more efficiently. Now you can criticize their training, I have no problem with that.

Click to expand...

Agents’ jobs are to follow whatever directives are given to them my leadership. If the directive is to hit quotas, they’re going to go after the easy ones, not the important ones.

iluvatar5150 said:

If the directive is to hit quotas, they’re going to go after the easy ones, not the important ones.

Click to expand...

If the directive is to do both then they will do both. Which is exactly what they should be doing.

essentialsaltes said:

Leading ICE agent spills on new recruits: 'Idiots'​

“The brand new agents are idiots,” the senior ICE agent said, speaking on the condition of anonymity.

That sentiment was “echoed by virtually everyone” Klippenstein spoke to at ICE, some of whom recounted stunning anecdotes about the on-the-job behavior of some of the new recruits.

“A lot of the guys are honestly pretty sketchy,” said another ICE agent, who Klippenstein wrote was a “new recruit.” “I thought federal agents were supposed to be clean cut but some of them pass around a flask as we are watching a suspect.”

Click to expand...

idk, that sounds pretty old school to me.

ThatRobGuy said:

He's stated both "it's not our city's job to help enforce federal laws"

Click to expand...

That’s true. It’s not their job.

ThatRobGuy said:

and "ICE, get the <bleep> out, we don't want you in our city"

Click to expand...

This was after the death of Rene Goode.

Not hard to understand why a mayor would rather stand by the citizens of his city after that than with the invading force of the federal government that has now killed multiple people while conducting their operations in his area.

GoldenBoy89 said:

That’s true. It’s not their job.

This was after the death of Rene Goode.

Not hard to understand why a mayor would rather stand by the citizens of his city after that than with the invading force of the federal government that has now killed multiple people while conducting their operations in his area.

Click to expand...

Had he been cooperative and receptive beforehand, and only changed the rhetoric after the event, then you may have a point.

But Mayor Frey's hostility toward the concept of deporting undocumented people, along with his penchant for bending to whatever the most progressive of his voters want, predates the shooting that occurred.

January of last year (long before the recent high profile shootings) in the week following Trump's inauguration, Mayor Frey made the following public statement.

From January 2025:
Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey announced Tuesday that his administration will not cooperate with federal immigration enforcement, setting up a potential conflict with President Donald Trump’s renewed crackdown on illegal immigration. The announcement comes as Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents conducted nationwide roundups, detaining more than 1,200 illegal immigrants charged with or convicted of crimes over the first weekend of Trump’s second term.

Speaking at a press conference, Frey reaffirmed the city’s stance as a sanctuary jurisdiction, pledging that local law enforcement would not assist ICE in its deportation operations.

“I want to speak directly to people who are undocumented: we love you. We care about you,” Frey said. “In the city of Minneapolis, we will stand up for you and we will do anything in our power to help"

“Now, in Minneapolis we have expanded our separation ordinance,” Frey explained. “And it states clearly that our city officials, our police officers and beyond will not be gathering information showing who is and is not documented.”


Again, let the record show, that was Frey's statement a week after inauguration day, a full 11 months before Trump sent ICE to his city for the operation.

And, Frey signed a citywide executive order banning federal officials from using city property for staging areas a month before Operation Metro Surge began.

So no, it's not about the shootings, Frey's current messaging/actions would've been the same with or without the shootings. Let's just be frank...it's a liberal mayor in big blue city full of liberal people who are ideologically opposed to deporting undocumented, that's why he's opposed to it. The shootings that occurred just afforded them a convenient bit of post hoc justification for their position that already existed.

And to your last part, yes, it's not hard to understand why he would want to appeal to his voters more than any other entity.

Hence the reason why we have levels of government and separation of powers between those levels. If left to their own devices, lots of big city mayors would opt to "look out for #1... screw whatever anyone else in the country voted for"

GoldenBoy89 said:

That’s true. It’s not their job.

Click to expand...

No one is asking them to do the job of BP. We arw asking that they cooperate with ICE and BP. In other words, honor deportation orders. Let ICE know when there is an illegal in their jails. When ICE comes to pick up an illegal they have a warrant (including administrative warrants) or deportation order on, then let them pick them up. Wherever they are.

Then if someone tries to obstruct or prevent or interfere with the pick up, the local police should respond and handle it, arresting and charging those who are breaking the laws, whether they be state or local or traffic laws. They wouldn't be required to help BP or ICE in the pickup or arrest of the person. They wouldn't be required to detain or help detain anyone wanted by ICE or BP. They would just be ther to make sure that citizens and non-citizens alike do not interfere with what the feds are doing.

This would prevent rhe vast majority of issues we are seeing today. It would help keep agents and citizens safer.

GoldenBoy89 said:

This was after the death of Rene Goode.

Click to expand...

That is demonstrably untrue. The mayor absolutely was using that or similar rhetoric long before.

GoldenBoy89 said:

Not hard to understand why a mayor would rather stand by the citizens of his city after that than with the invading force of the federal government that has now killed multiple people while conducting their operations in his area.

Click to expand...

Its not hard to understand, becauae the mayor only cares about his re-election. He doesn't care about law and order. He honestly doesn't care about his people's safety. If he did, he would tell his people to leave BP alone and let them do their job, because interfering only puts everyone at risk. Just like it would if the citizens interfered with local.law enforcement doing their jobs.

The governement doing its job is NOT an invading force. That is actually violent rhetoric. Why? Becauae what to you do with an invading force? Whatever you have to to get rid of them.

Why has the government killed people?
1. One was shot when she was in the process of hitting a LE officer with her car. Circumstances matter. It was justifiable.
2. One was killed when he attacked an LE officer with a shovel. Circumstances matter. It was justifiable.
3. The third one was killed when he interfered with LE operation. He also resisted arrest. Had he not he would still be alive. Circumstances matter. This one is not settled yet. We have more to learn about what happened.

One thing they all have in common is people obstructing, interfering and in one case purposely assaulting an officer. In Goode's case we don't know if she intentionally hit the agent with her car or not. Even if she didn't do it intentionally she still hit him, which make the shooting legally justifiable, whether you think so or not.

As I said, in each case people are dead either because they where involved in Circumstances of obstructing, interfering and resisting or assaulting. If they all would have left the agents alone to do their jobs, they would all be alive today. Nothing good ever comes from doing those things to Law Enforcement.

As a society we used to know this.

essentialsaltes said:

Speaking of the worst of the worst... the fat illiterate violent slobs must be running the DHS websites.

DHS Admits Its Website Featuring ‘Worst of the Worst’ Arrests Is Full of Mistakes​

The DHS website, “Arrested: Worst Of the Worst,” features the name, crimes, and location of arrest for thousands of people the agency claims were arrested by Immigration and Customs Enforcement. But after CNN questioned DHS on the findings of an analysis of the website, the agency conceded that a large swath of the information was incorrect.

CNN’s analysis found that hundreds of the persons listed on the website had been arrested or convicted of very minor crimes, such as a singular traffic offence or marijuana possession.

Click to expand...

So, they didn't list more recent stuff like re-entry which is a felony along with the traffic offense arrest? Do they list the traffic offense rhe person was arrested for? Typically its not just for speeding. Arrest is usually for SERIOUS traffic offenses like DUI or Reckless driving etc which puts the public at risk.

Seems like this is much ado about nothing.

rjs330 said:

So, they didn't list more recent stuff like re-entry which is a felony along with the traffic offense arrest? Do they list the traffic offense rhe person was arrested for? Typically its not just for speeding. Arrest is usually for SERIOUS traffic offenses like DUI or Reckless driving etc which puts the public at risk.

Click to expand...

Why do you believe that the traffic offenses are usually for serious offenses?

rjs330 said:

Seems like this is much ado about nothing.

Click to expand...

With their ginormous budget, why can't they get the information correct? Is it deliberate or carelessness?

DaisyDay said:

Why do you believe that the traffic offenses are usually for serious offenses?

Click to expand...

I'm talking arrested. Police do not typically arrest people for minor traffic offenses. You get a ticket and move on. It sounds like people were ARRESTED for traffic offenses which is typically a serious offense that puts people and property in danger. Like DUI.

DaisyDay said:

With their ginormous budget, why can't they get the information correct? Is it deliberate or carelessness?

Click to expand...

Probably carelessness. I mean why wouldnt you include rhe fact that the people also had re-entry issues along with the other arrest? Seems like they are being careless.

essentialsaltes said:

ICE whistleblower accuses agency of ‘deficient, defective and broken’ training amid hiring surge​

A U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) whistleblower accused the agency of lying about shortchanging its training, including legal training over whether they are permitted to use deadly force, amid a hiring surge of new officers.

Ryan Schwank, a former lawyer for ICE, said training for new officers has been pared down to the point where it is “deficient, defective and broken” ... He accused ICE leaders of shielding training shortcuts from the public.

“For the last five months, I watched ICE dismantle the training program, cutting 240 hours of vital classes from a 584 hour program, classes that teach the Constitution, our legal system, firearms training, the use of force, lawful arrests, proper detention and the limits of officers’ authority,” said Schwank, who recently trained cadets at the ICE academy in Georgia.

“They ceased all of the legal instructions regarding use of force. This means that cadets are not taught what it means to be objectively reasonable, the very standard which the law requires them to meet when deciding whether or not to use deadly force."

DHS spox: “The training does not stop after graduation from the academy—Recruits are put on a rigorous on-the-job training program that is tracked and monitored.”

[On the job training on the use of deadly force?!?]

He also said trainees are receiving inaccurate information about the lawful limits of their authority, including that they may enter homes without a judicial warrant. "I was instructed to read and return a memo in my supervisor’s presence which claimed ICE officers could enter homes without a judicial warrant."

“Never in my career had I ever received such a blatantly unlawful order, nor one conveyed in such a troubling manner. Incredibly, I was being shown this memo in secret by my supervisor who made sure that I understood that disobedience could cost me my job. ICE is teaching cadets to violate the Constitution.”

Click to expand...

If this is true, it is unacceptable. Period. Like what happens when we do DEI hires instead of competent people.

rjs330 said:

I'm talking arrested. Police do not typically arrest people for minor traffic offenses. You get a ticket and move on. It sounds like people were ARRESTED for traffic offenses which is typically a serious offense that puts people and property in danger. Like DUI.

Click to expand...

I think you misunderstood the article.

ICE has a website that claims to list the so-called "worst of the worst" criminal illegal aliens who they have arrested and/or deported. The assumption would be that these are people, in the country illegally, who have committed violent felonies like rape, murder, assault, burglary, or perhaps drug traffickers and human traffickers - separate of any immigration-related offenses. I doubt you'd find any significant number of people who would advocate for these people to be allowed to stay in the US (outside of perhaps serving out their prison sentences).

However, the crimes listed for many of these "worst of the worst" were comparatively minor - illegal re-entry, drug possession, traffic violations, etc. That's not necessarily what ICE arrested them for, just what is on their criminal record. Someone probably would not have been arrested for a singular traffic violation, but if they plead guilty/accepted the fine, it would still show up as a conviction on their record.

And, while illegal re-entry, for example, is a felony, I wouldn't call someone whose only crime was entering the country illegally after being kicked out before "the worst of the worst."

rjs330 said:

If this is true, it is unacceptable. Period. Like what happens when we do DEI hires instead of competent people.

Click to expand...

ICE Unloads (interviews of actual ICE agents)