I saw this photograph in The New York Times.
It’s an ICE agent in Minneapolis, looking fearsome. His gun appears to be pointed at the photographer’s head or just over his right shoulder.
He is standing guard as other federal agents are cuffing a person who is face-down on the ground. This is a common tactic. Instead of cuffing a suspect as they stand, the armed ones throw them to the ground, face down, and three or four immobilize him or her, then cuff them.
I immediately noticed that this aggressive guy was wearing combat pants that had a large hole in them.
He doesn’t seem to wear underpants.
Do you see what I see?
What a dork!
Diane Ravitch's blog 
I see England. I see France….,
LikeLiked by 1 person
That’s his air conditioning.
LikeLiked by 1 person
HERE’S HOW STATES AND CITIES WILL PROSECUTE ROGUE ICE AGENTS
In the case of “In Re Neagle” the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that federal agents who use more force than is “necessary and proper” CAN BE PROSECUTED BY STATE GOVERNMENTS.
The first federal officer to be prosecuted under the Court’s “Neagle” ruling was the FBI agent who shot the wife of gun rights activist Randy Weaver at Ruby Ridge, Idaho. Conservatives and gun rights activists cheered that prosecution.
In the case of “Barnes v. Felix” the Court UNANIMOUSLY ruled that in cases such as the ICE shooting of Renee Good and Felix Pretti in Minneapolis the “totality of circumstances” must be taken into account. In the case of Mrs. Good, she had just less than a minute before said to the agent who shot her: “That’s fine, dude. I’m not mad at you”, and then she began to drive away at a perfectly normal speed, not charging at the officer, and in fact turning away from the officer.
In the Supreme Court-required “totality of circumstance” it’s clear that the agent knew Mrs. Good wasn’t a threat to him and yet he used deadly force that was not “necessary and proper”. He could likely be arrested and tried under both rulings.
State and local police can intervene on behalf of citizens when ICE is violating the Supreme Court’s “necessary and proper” ruling and when ICE is ignoring the Court’s “totality of circumstance” ruling.
(You may copy this and share it — especially with civil rights lawyers.)
LikeLike
Well, to be fair, we *did* say we want more transparency.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Is this what is meant by “Ice Out?”
LikeLiked by 1 person
whatever it is, ewww.
LikeLike
Too bad his face was covered … otherwise he would have been embarrassed for life! Deservedly so!
LikeLike
I’m more concerned about that hand-held bazooka he has pointed at the camera. I’m guessing it’s probably a tear gas gun?
LikeLike