6 ms·

The fact the FBI participated in this arrest is chilling. ICE being a proto secret police seems to be perceived already. The FBI now? There’s question whether

The fact the FBI participated in this arrest is chilling. ICE being a proto secret police seems to be perceived already. The FBI now? There’s question whether the ICE agents even had legal grounds to demand arrest regardless, whether they had a warrant, etc - and the facts established are pretty clearly not prosecutable. So this is pure intimidation, going after the judicial in what will likely be a flagrantly abusive way, yet doing it proudly and across the media - this is a shot across the bow telling judges at all levels they are next. And if there’s anyone that knows being arrested changes your life forever, it’s judges. I am not alarmist or hyperbolic by nature, and I don’t say this lightly, but this is the next level and the escalation event that leads to the end game. The separation of powers is unraveling, and this is America’s Sulla moment where the republic cracks. The question remains did the anti federalists bake enough stability into the constitution to ensure our first Sulla doesn’t lead to Julius Caesar.

EgregiousCube 2y ago
The accused is accused of violating federal law, so it's normal that a federal agency would make the arrest. FBI seems to make more sense than DEA or ATF, no?
- fnordpiglet 2y ago
  It’s not that the agency is wrong; it’s that the agency would do it. This is the agency that since J Edgar Hoover has very carefully rebuilt its reputation and is very guarded in it. This act is entirely reminiscent of the political corruption of the FBI of old. That regression, that fast, is frightening. ICE being shady is by many people accepted, the DEA, ATF even. But the FBI has built itself a pretty strong reputation of integrity and professionalism, and resistance to political pressure and corruption. In some ways I at least viewed it as a firewall in law enforcement against this sort of stuff. Now who watches the watchers?
  - ty6853 2y ago
    ICE, ATF, and CBP has always been the house for the dregs of federal LEO. It is for the people that fail to get into anything else. FBI is prestigious because they get the most qualified tyrants, who are smart enough to lie and deceive in ways that are airtight enough that those at ICE take the heat. The surprising thing here isn't the fact that they did it, but that they didn't do the normal way of digging or manufacturing something else to pin on the judge.
    - lliamander 2y ago
      Anecdotally, I have heard that the most trustworthy (perhaps only trustworthy) Federal law enforcement group is the US Marshalls.
      - ty6853 2y ago
        US Marshalls IIRC is also the hardest to get into. If I recall they have like one day a year they accept applications and they all (only certain # accepted) get filled within seconds. (I'm probably embellishing but not by much).
  - mlinhares 2y ago
    For most of its life the FBI has been a hand of the federal government to quell dissent, this new perspective on the FBI being professional and non-partisan is pretty new.
    - fnordpiglet 2y ago
      Yes it is - and it was carefully cultured over decades. A reputation takes years to build and seconds to destroy. Mission accomplished.
      - mlinhares 2y ago
        This might be the largest problem with the US government, most of what we used to take for granted isn't really enshrined in law anywhere, it was mostly a gentlemen's agreement that "you just don't do that, it's ungentlemanly" and not really law or anything enforceable. The fact you can just fire the whole federal government (yes, i understand the probation thing) and there's *nothing* that blocks it is just completely bonkers to me. All you really needed was a bad actor that had no respect for the norms, because there's no real consequence to breaking them.
- scoofy 2y ago
  >The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. You can't just arrest someone for nothing. You need probable cause. The question is whether a judge going about their day, doing nothing illegal, is probable cause. It's very likely not.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
gitfan86 2y ago
[flagged]
- epistasis 2y ago
  The executive must also uphold the constitution, no matter what vague campaign promises were made.
- Hikikomori 2y ago
  Did he also say he would deport people without a criminal record, that are here legally, and without due process?
- boroboro4 2y ago
  You would be surprised but our constitution is not "We vote for a king every 4 years and do whatever king desires" in fact.
  - gitfan86 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - pests 2y ago
      "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." How is this being followed? Specifically, "nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." This is what people are upset with, not your (loaded language) "violent immigrants"
      - gitfan86 2y ago
        The way I read it is that US citizens have a right to not be murdered or assaulted by people who enter the country illegally. So it seems like a Judge would have an obligation to prevent someone accused of being in the country illegally and accused of a violent crime to not leave the courthouse and instead turn that person over to the federal authorities who are outside the court waiting for the proceedings to finish.
epistasis 2y ago
This is certainly not the first autocratic act of the FBI under Patel. They have been thoroughly compromised and lost integrity even before this arrest.
exe34 2y ago
> ICE being a proto secret police people think the Musk administration is dumb and incompetent, but this is incredibly clever. ICE is the prefect cover for a new unaccountable secret police. anybody can be disappeared under the excuse of illegal immigration. if there's no due process, they can come for you and you have no recourse. plenty of MAGAs are so ready to shout "but they're criminals" - and they still don't understand that it could be them next.
ajross 2y ago
> The fact the FBI participated in this arrest is chilling Even more frightening is that there was a federal judge that was willing to sign off on an arrest warrant for a fellow jurist, based on what is clearly political showmanship (they didn't need to arrest her at all to prosecute this crime!). There were a lot of Rubicons crossed today. This ends with opposition politicians in jail. Every time. And usually to some level of armed revolt around/preventing transfers of power.
- dredmorbius 2y ago
  With AII.S2.C1.3.1 power jails are porous. There's one effective sentence, if gained, which avoids this. I'm ordinarily #NotAFan, and that's another Rubicon once crossed presents massive peril, but in cases of flagrant constitutional violation I'm increasingly open to arguments in favour. If that sentence cannot be attained, options are even more parlous.

EgregiousCube 2y ago

The accused is accused of violating federal law, so it's normal that a federal agency would make the arrest. FBI seems to make more sense than DEA or ATF, no?

fnordpiglet 2y ago
It’s not that the agency is wrong; it’s that the agency would do it. This is the agency that since J Edgar Hoover has very carefully rebuilt its reputation and is very guarded in it. This act is entirely reminiscent of the political corruption of the FBI of old. That regression, that fast, is frightening. ICE being shady is by many people accepted, the DEA, ATF even. But the FBI has built itself a pretty strong reputation of integrity and professionalism, and resistance to political pressure and corruption. In some ways I at least viewed it as a firewall in law enforcement against this sort of stuff. Now who watches the watchers?
- ty6853 2y ago
  ICE, ATF, and CBP has always been the house for the dregs of federal LEO. It is for the people that fail to get into anything else. FBI is prestigious because they get the most qualified tyrants, who are smart enough to lie and deceive in ways that are airtight enough that those at ICE take the heat. The surprising thing here isn't the fact that they did it, but that they didn't do the normal way of digging or manufacturing something else to pin on the judge.
  - lliamander 2y ago
    Anecdotally, I have heard that the most trustworthy (perhaps only trustworthy) Federal law enforcement group is the US Marshalls.
    - ty6853 2y ago
      US Marshalls IIRC is also the hardest to get into. If I recall they have like one day a year they accept applications and they all (only certain # accepted) get filled within seconds. (I'm probably embellishing but not by much).
- mlinhares 2y ago
  For most of its life the FBI has been a hand of the federal government to quell dissent, this new perspective on the FBI being professional and non-partisan is pretty new.
  - fnordpiglet 2y ago
    Yes it is - and it was carefully cultured over decades. A reputation takes years to build and seconds to destroy. Mission accomplished.
    - mlinhares 2y ago
      This might be the largest problem with the US government, most of what we used to take for granted isn't really enshrined in law anywhere, it was mostly a gentlemen's agreement that "you just don't do that, it's ungentlemanly" and not really law or anything enforceable. The fact you can just fire the whole federal government (yes, i understand the probation thing) and there's *nothing* that blocks it is just completely bonkers to me. All you really needed was a bad actor that had no respect for the norms, because there's no real consequence to breaking them.
scoofy 2y ago
>The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. You can't just arrest someone for nothing. You need probable cause. The question is whether a judge going about their day, doing nothing illegal, is probable cause. It's very likely not.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]

gitfan86 2y ago

[flagged]

epistasis 2y ago
The executive must also uphold the constitution, no matter what vague campaign promises were made.
Hikikomori 2y ago
Did he also say he would deport people without a criminal record, that are here legally, and without due process?
boroboro4 2y ago
You would be surprised but our constitution is not "We vote for a king every 4 years and do whatever king desires" in fact.
- gitfan86 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - pests 2y ago
    "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." How is this being followed? Specifically, "nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." This is what people are upset with, not your (loaded language) "violent immigrants"
    - gitfan86 2y ago
      The way I read it is that US citizens have a right to not be murdered or assaulted by people who enter the country illegally. So it seems like a Judge would have an obligation to prevent someone accused of being in the country illegally and accused of a violent crime to not leave the courthouse and instead turn that person over to the federal authorities who are outside the court waiting for the proceedings to finish.

epistasis 2y ago

This is certainly not the first autocratic act of the FBI under Patel. They have been thoroughly compromised and lost integrity even before this arrest.

exe34 2y ago

> ICE being a proto secret police people think the Musk administration is dumb and incompetent, but this is incredibly clever. ICE is the prefect cover for a new unaccountable secret police. anybody can be disappeared under the excuse of illegal immigration. if there's no due process, they can come for you and you have no recourse. plenty of MAGAs are so ready to shout "but they're criminals" - and they still don't understand that it could be them next.

ajross 2y ago

> The fact the FBI participated in this arrest is chilling Even more frightening is that there was a federal judge that was willing to sign off on an arrest warrant for a fellow jurist, based on what is clearly political showmanship (they didn't need to arrest her at all to prosecute this crime!). There were a lot of Rubicons crossed today. This ends with opposition politicians in jail. Every time. And usually to some level of armed revolt around/preventing transfers of power.

dredmorbius 2y ago
With AII.S2.C1.3.1 power jails are porous. There's one effective sentence, if gained, which avoids this. I'm ordinarily #NotAFan, and that's another Rubicon once crossed presents massive peril, but in cases of flagrant constitutional violation I'm increasingly open to arguments in favour. If that sentence cannot be attained, options are even more parlous.