You don't know me at all, or who I support
You do realize, sir, you are at odds with yourself:
Protesting round up of illegals. I guess you all support the illegals.
So, let's be clear:
You're like all dumb idiot liberals who think everyone who doesn't agree with them on everything is a flaming conservative.
Vapid hypocritical spite does
not abide your—
I'm more center balanced than you could ever dream to be.
—meaningless, typal boast.
Your manner of antiliberalism is hardly new—
I also know about riots and bad policing. I went through the 60's with both experiences.
—including the distinctive insubstantiality of claims to wisdom.
So, instead of pretending to know what you think, let's just go ahead and ask. The lede out of Arizona:
A U.S. marshal was mistakenly detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents in Arizona, officials said Friday.
The deputy marshal was briefly detained in the lobby of a federal building in Tucson because he “fit the general description of a subject being sought by ICE,” according to a statement from a U.S. Marshals Service spokesperson shared with NBC News on Friday. It is not clear when the incident took place.
(NBC News↱)
So, is that
good policing? Is that what you call rounding up the illegals? Because in a circumstance when they're detaining American citizens, Native Americans, and American veterans for fitting the general description, is the escalation to detaining active law enforcers for looking too much like an uncertain description of an unnamed subject an example of
good policing?
Because this kind of rounding up is part of what people are protesting.
Or, for instance, there's the part where they arrest and deport someone without cause, and when ordered to return him to the country indict him according to an investigation that did not open until his arrest and deportation was publicly controversial. An alleged good cop has resigned over the irregularity of the indictment, of which a
former U.S. Attorney↱ observes, "This is practically unheard of. I don't remember this happening during my 25 years at DOJ. Bypassing a Criminal Chief's determination that a case should not be indicted suggests serious problems."
†
There is a way in which none of this is surprising, but that's the thing, we are expected to believe these law enforcers, and the conservatives who support them, are better people than that. Seriously, in terms of general declarative statements about what other people believe, sure, I could have told you forty years ago that the only rule of law conservatives respect is the one they impose on others; I could have told you, way back when, that they believe in a caste system wherein equality occurs within one's station, but not outside it. I could have told you, back when I was a kid, who the fascists were.
And it's true, back in the Nineties, it would have been some kind of inappropriate to suggest that the random former servicemenber a newspaper talked to about an election, the guy who supported the white supremacist candidate with a Nazi problem, was the kind of person conservatives and the post-Reagan evangelical Christians wanted enforcing the laws and even writing them in Congress. That is, sure, anyone willing to be edgy enough, or whatever we called it back then, could have said it, but it was kind of an offensive suggestion that the people complaining about music and books were fascists or Nazi sympathizers, or any of that, even when they advertised book- and record-burning bonfires at summer camp.¹
Here, look: "I also know about riots and bad policing," you said. "I went through the 60's with both experiences." Except that tells us nothing. Well, maybe we can look around for some clarification:
• "Protesting round up of illegals. I guess you all support the illegals."
(#3}
• "So you support rioting and the destruction of property.Go join Antifa."
(#7↑)
• "You're like all dumb idiot liberals who think everyone who doesn't agree with them on everything is a flaming conservative."
(#12)
Yeah, that's some dreamy center balance.
____________________
Notes:
¹ Yes, really. Dave Roever's ministry, mid to late Eighties. And it would be nice to be able to afford to forget Pat Robertson's summer camp to straighten out our sexually-confused daughters, all of like ten years ago, so, again, let's take a moment to think about easy declarative generalization, because somewhere around there we encounter a threshold where it seems like some conservatives and Christians are really, really confused about the importance of consent in sexual conduct; i.e., as nice as it would be to be able to afford to leave that unfortunate hit back in 1992, it was Christians who dragged that argument into the twenty-first century, and if it's not on the table at the moment, it's because the point is now too subtle for the current batch of right-wingers, who are down to weird fantasies about how schoolchildren go to the bathroom.
@JoyceWhuteVance. "This is practically unheard of. I don't remember this happening during my 25 years at DOJ. Bypassing a Criminal Chief's determination that a case should not be indicted suggests serious problems. Prosecutors will still have to persuade a unanimous jury to convict; if they can." X. 6 June 2025. X.com. 8 June 2025. status/1931107902489854015
Alsharif, Mirna and Cristian Santana. "ICE agents mistakenly detain U.S. marshal in Arizona". NBC News. 7 June 2025. NBCNews.com. 8 June 2025. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/ice-mistakenly-detain-us-marshal-rcna211599
