Tom Homan warns 'bloodshed' will continue unless 'hateful rhetoric' from politicians stops

[Valletta]

Video:

Tom Homan warns 'bloodshed' will continue unless 'hateful rhetoric' from politicians stops​

Tom Homan warns 'bloodshed' will continue unless 'hateful rhetoric' from politicians stops | Fox News Video

Border czar Tom Homan discusses President Donald Trump’s claim of having the 'most secure border ever,' ICE enforcement priorities and what agents refuse to tolerate on 'Sunday Morning Futures.'

www.foxnews.com

Everyone needs to follow the law and respect those who are trying to follow the law and who care about the welfare of everyone. Homan stressed how many women and children are not dying or not being abused by closing the border. Those who continue with the violent rhetoric need to stop.

 

[Trogdor the Burninator]

Video:

Tom Homan warns 'bloodshed' will continue unless 'hateful rhetoric' from politicians stops​

Tom Homan warns 'bloodshed' will continue unless 'hateful rhetoric' from politicians stops | Fox News Video

Border czar Tom Homan discusses President Donald Trump’s claim of having the 'most secure border ever,' ICE enforcement priorities and what agents refuse to tolerate on 'Sunday Morning Futures.'

www.foxnews.com

Everyone needs to follow the law and respect those who are trying to follow the law and who care about the welfare of everyone. Homan stressed how many women and children are not dying or not being abused by closing the border. Those who continue with the violent rhetoric need to stop.

I presume "follow the law" includes ICE? Perhaps they could stop kidnapping US citizens for starters.

The "bloodshed" will come when a US citizen exercises their 2nd amendment rights - you know, the ones the NRA go on and on about - to defend themselves from plain-clothes, unbadged goons carjacking and kidnapping people off the street.

 

[Richard T]

I presume "follow the law" includes ICE? Perhaps they could stop kidnapping US citizens for starters.

The "bloodshed" will come when a US citizen exercises their 2nd amendment rights - you know, the ones the NRA go on and on about - to defend themselves from plain-clothes, unbadged goons carjacking and kidnapping people off the street.

I agree. Lots of hate speech and undermining of the US judicial branch too. People get in an uproar when the courts make a determination and politicians dismiss it like they are above the law. If a lower court decision is wrong, appeal it. Until then comply. Anything else is rebellion.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

I presume "follow the law" includes ICE? Perhaps they could stop kidnapping US citizens for starters.

The "bloodshed" will come when a US citizen exercises their 2nd amendment rights - you know, the ones the NRA go on and on about - to defend themselves from plain-clothes, unbadged goons carjacking and kidnapping people off the street.

I agree. Lots of hate speech and undermining of the US judicial branch too. People get in an uproar when the courts make a determination and politicians dismiss it like they are above the law. If a lower court decision is wrong, appeal it. Until then comply. Anything else is rebellion.

I would suggest that these are hyperbolically inaccurate descriptions of what's actually happening.

1) When law enforcement encounters a person who fits the description of someone who's engaged in a crime, in a venue that the crime has been known to take place in, bringing them in for questioning isn't "kidnapping".

If the cops were looking for "biker gangs dealing meth in parking lots", and a biker (tatted up and wearing a 1% cut) is standing in the parking lot of a biker bar where those activities have taken place, taking the guy in for questioning isn't "kidnapping"

2) Criticisms of the judicial branch aren't "hate speech". There's nothing wrong with questioning why a single appointed circuit judge (out of 900+ circuit judges) can effectively put the kibosh on a duly elected president and/or legislatures agenda (coast to coast) via a strategy known as "forum shopping".

People on the left obviously had a problem with SCOTUS on a few recent cases, the fact that they accurately pointed out that they are appointed positions (meaning the executive can stack the deck), and that judiciary has an outsized amount of power on such matters, wouldn't constitute "hate speech"

The figurative talk of the legislative and executive branch "thinking they're above the law" is ironic considering that the judicial branch is the only one that is quite literally "above the law". They're literally the only branch where they make claim to be able to "interpret the spirit of a law" (which is coded language for "make a decision about this law based on my own preferences"), and apart from pardon power, there is no check on them outside of their own branch.

No other branch has such broad nullification powers via a mere "I interpret this to be unconstitutional".

 

[Richard T]

I would suggest that these are hyperbolically inaccurate descriptions of what's actually happening.

1) When law enforcement encounters a person who fits the description of someone who's engaged in a crime, in a venue that the crime has been known to take place in, bringing them in for questioning isn't "kidnapping".

If the cops were looking for "biker gangs dealing meth in parking lots", and a biker (tatted up and wearing a 1% cut) is standing in the parking lot of a biker bar where those activities have taken place, taking the guy in for questioning isn't "kidnapping"

2) Criticisms of the judicial branch aren't "hate speech". There's nothing wrong with questioning why a single appointed circuit judge (out of 900+ circuit judges) can effectively put the kibosh on a duly elected president and/or legislatures agenda (coast to coast) via a strategy known as "forum shopping".

People on the left obviously had a problem with SCOTUS on a few recent cases, the fact that they accurately pointed out that they are appointed positions (meaning the executive can stack the deck), and that judiciary has an outsized amount of power on such matters, wouldn't constitute "hate speech"

The figurative talk of the legislative and executive branch "thinking they're above the law" is ironic considering that the judicial branch is the only one that is quite literally "above the law". They're literally the only branch where they make claim to be able to "interpret the spirit of a law" (which is coded language for "make a decision about this law based on my own preferences"), and apart from pardon power, there is no check on them outside of their own branch.

No other branch has such broad nullification powers via a mere "I interpret this to be unconstitutional".

The courts do not seek out cases of conflict. They accept what is given to them. Sure there is some partisianship in the courts, and in instances of abuse at the District level, one can criticize all they want but only appeals or other legal means are what matters. Trump's administration belittling the courts, calling for resignations or impeachment because of a poor decision are ridiculous. How many cases has the executive branch lost? Quite a few (Biden too) yet few call for their impeachment over a bad legal decision. Trump himself says nasty things about anyone that criticizes or stands in the way. It is far more than just Boasberg (sp) or any single judge.
In some instances we have had ICE lying about suspects, lying about procedures. This occurs in all law enforcement and hopefully it is a small number that do that. I agree that there may not be kidnapping, but there is harassment, profiling where there is not probably cause, excessive use of force in rare instances, and detainments and even extraditions that are against sound reasoning. and in a few cases a direct court order that is ignored. Everyone acts like time is of the essence in breaking families apart and getting their quota of immigrants deported, or on the flip side, green cards or immigrant status done quickly. That is not how the U.S. overwhelmed court and immigration system works.
Both Maga and the left should take a breather and enjoy even each other and the greatness that America offers. I admit sometimes it is almost entertaining to watch all the grandstanding and in some cases the hate that many spew out. Shame on me. Sadly, though it likely is going to get worse but that is what we deserve when we elect representatives that seem to lack the skills and policies to move America forward in ways that are not so brazen and rife with conflict.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Mr. Homen, like so many of Trump's lackey's seem intent on inviting indictment.

 

[Valletta]

The courts do not seek out cases of conflict. They accept what is given to them. Sure there is some partisianship in the courts, and in instances of abuse at the District level, one can criticize all they want but only appeals or other legal means are what matters. Trump's administration belittling the courts, calling for resignations or impeachment because of a poor decision are ridiculous. How many cases has the executive branch lost?

We have seen a prosecutor get elected based on getting Trump. The judicial system of fairness and balance has been a mockery of in order to try and stop the leading candidate for president from getting elected. We have seen anti-Trump political leaders use violent rhetoric against Trump and his supporters, even threatening two Supreme Court justices if they vote for a position supported by Trump. And we have seen a president refuse to see the law was enforced to protect those Supreme Court justices. A gag order went out against Trump at the height of the presidential election by a judge who made up a value for Mar-a-lago that had no basis in reality--just to get Trump. The violent rhetoric almost cost Trump his life, it did cost Charlie Kirk his life. It could have cost two Supreme Court justices their lives. Homan is right, and a good number of leaders within the Islamist/Marxist coalition surely know the likely consequences of their actions.

 

[Perpetual Student]

2) Criticisms of the judicial branch aren't "hate speech". There's nothing wrong with questioning why a single appointed circuit judge (out of 900+ circuit judges) can effectively put the kibosh on a duly elected president and/or legislatures agenda (coast to coast) via a strategy known as "forum shopping".

But what we see isn't criticism. It is a systematic and orchestrated attack from the Right on every judge that dare to rule the way MAGA doesn't like.
With the predictability of the Swiss Railways the phrase Obama appointed America hating activist commie judge will be used. ANd never ever will the substance of the ruling be addressed.

 

[Trogdor the Burninator]

I would suggest that these are hyperbolically inaccurate descriptions of what's actually happening.

1) When law enforcement encounters a person who fits the description of someone who's engaged in a crime, in a venue that the crime has been known to take place in, bringing them in for questioning isn't "kidnapping".

What about when ICE agents crash into a passing motorists car, then drag a lone woman from that car at gunpoint, take her into custody without any reason or warrant, deny her medical treatment, then drop all charges. Google "Dayanne Figueroa" since CF is blocking URL links right now.

If it happened in Lebanon, or Iran, we'd call it what it was - kidnapping. It's a kidnapping.

 

[Perpetual Student]

What about when ICE agents crash into a passing motorists car, then drag a lone woman from that car at gunpoint, take her into custody without any reason or warrant, deny her medical treatment, then drop all charges. Google "Dayanne Figueroa" since CF is blocking URL links right now.

If it happened in Lebanon, or Iran, we'd call it what it was - kidnapping. It's a kidnapping.

When ICE does it, it will be labelled as "physically enhanced traffic stop."

 

[Valletta]

When ICE does it, it will be labelled as "physically enhanced traffic stop."

What about when people strike ICE officers and call up their families with death threats?

 

[Perpetual Student]

What about when people strike ICE officers and call up their families with death threats?

"Part of the job."

 

[Valletta]

But what we see isn't criticism. It is a systematic and orchestrated attack from the Right on every judge that dare to rule the way MAGA doesn't like.
With the predictability of the Swiss Railways the phrase Obama appointed America hating activist commie judge will be used. ANd never ever will the substance of the ruling be addressed.

We have seen Supreme Court justices openly threatened by a leading Democrat, with Joe Biden refusing to enforce the law to protect them.

 

[Larniavc]

Homan stressed how many women and children are not dying or not being abused by closing the border.

Exactly how many women and children are not dying or being abused? And who isn’t doing it on the border?

 

[Larniavc]

What about when people strike ICE officers and call up their families with death threats?

Get a different job. Choices have consequences.

 

[Servus]

I presume "follow the law" includes ICE? Perhaps they could stop kidnapping US citizens for starters.

The "bloodshed" will come when a US citizen exercises their 2nd amendment rights - you know, the ones the NRA go on and on about - to defend themselves from plain-clothes, unbadged goons carjacking and kidnapping people off the street.

Right, nowadays the police arresting people is kidnapping. Every time someone ends up in handcuffs in the back of a police car, the arresting officer(s) should be charged with felony kidnapping.

 

[Valletta]

Exactly how many women and children are not dying or being abused? And who isn’t doing it on the border?

Joe told them to "come" and many died on the dangerous trip through Mexico. Closing our border to illegals saves many from being trafficked.

 

[Trogdor the Burninator]

Right, nowadays the police arresting people is kidnapping. Every time someone ends up in handcuffs in the back of a police car, the arresting officer(s) should be charged with felony kidnapping.

No. But ICE dragging innocent US citizens from their cars at gunpoint and detaining them without charge certainly is.

 

[Larniavc]

Joe told them to "come" and many died on the dangerous trip through Mexico. Closing our border to illegals saves many from being trafficked.

How many are not dying or being abused?

 

[Richard T]

We have seen a prosecutor get elected based on getting Trump. The judicial system of fairness and balance has been a mockery of in order to try and stop the leading candidate for president from getting elected. We have seen anti-Trump political leaders use violent rhetoric against Trump and his supporters, even threatening two Supreme Court justices if they vote for a position supported by Trump. And we have seen a president refuse to see the law was enforced to protect those Supreme Court justices. A gag order went out against Trump at the height of the presidential election by a judge who made up a value for Mar-a-lago that had no basis in reality--just to get Trump. The violent rhetoric almost cost Trump his life, it did cost Charlie Kirk his life. It could have cost two Supreme Court justices their lives. Homan is right, and a good number of leaders within the Islamist/Marxist coalition surely know the likely consequences of their actions.

Yes, I agree with some of that bu there is hate on both sides and it seems to be getting worse. Just pray i guess and concentrate on other things more is the prescription for myself.