What follows is my edit of the high points from the 35-minute performance:
President Trump promised the American people, including the residents of Minnesota, that he would work to ensure our communities are safe. And with that, this administration has absolutely focused on identifying removable aliens that pose a public safety threat and national security threats. The numbers prove it. The data proves it. In the past few days, I have met with Governor Walz, Attorney General Ellison, Mayor Frey, numerous police chiefs and sheriffs, and I have more to meet. I'll also be continuing the dialogue with business and religious leaders in partnership in Minnesota—your communities. I'll be meeting with them too, because I want to hear what they have to say.
In my meetings with folks so far—and most importantly the governor and the AG to Mayor Fry—we didn't agree on everything. I didn't expect to agree on anything. I've heard many people want to know why we're talking to people who they don't consider friends of the administration. Bottom line is you can't fix problems if you don't have discussions. I didn't come to Minnesota for photo ops or headlines. I came here to seek solutions, and that's what we're going to do. We've come a long way, and we've got some good wins for the people of Minnesota, I think, and for the administration and for the safety [and] security of this city.
One thing we did agree on, though—everybody I talked to agreed on—was that community safety is paramount. One thing we all agreed on was [that] U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement is a legitimate law enforcement agency that has a duty to enforce the laws enacted by Congress and keep this community safe.
Like I've said many times for the last several years, even before this administration, jurisdictions that refuse to cooperate with federal immigration authorities are sanctuaries for criminals. Sanctuary cities are sanctuaries for criminals and endanger the residents of the community.
To be clear, we did not agree with Minnesota state and local officials that they would be involved in immigration enforcement. I didn't ask them to be immigration officers. I'm asking them to be cops working with the cops to help us take criminal aliens off the street.
What we did agree upon is not to release public safety threats back into the community and [that] they could be lawfully transferred to ICE. I'll speak more about that. I will highlight that the Minnesota State Prison System under the Department of Corrections has been honoring ICE detainers, and we appreciate the important collaboration. We're going to expand upon that. That decision has made Minnesota safer—not only for residents of Minnesota, but for the men and women of law enforcement, not just ICE, all law enforcement. Rather than arresting the same significant public safety threat over and over again, they agreed to work with us to identify those people and remove them.
I'm also pleased to announce I had a very good meeting with Attorney General Ellison, and he has clarified for me that county jails may notify ICE of the release dates of criminal public safety risks so ICE can take custody of them upon release from the jail. And let me tell you why that's important. I know people are a little concerned about law enforcement manpower. Look, I've said this many times before—I've said it for the last several years: Give us access to the illegal alien public safety threat in the safety and security of a jail. It's common sense. It's safer for the community. It's safer for the agent. And it's safer for the alien, because anything can happen on a street arrest. It just makes common sense.
And for the people that argue, "Well, we're a welcoming community because we want victims and witnesses of crime that are here illegally to feel safe to come to police without fear of working with ICE"—we're not going to talk to the victim [or] witness of the crime. There's no problem there. They should feel safe to come to the police and ask for help. All we want is to talk to the person that local and state law enforcement authorities locked in a jail cell. They chose to lock this person up. That's who we want to talk to: the public safety threat. So the argument that it protects victims [and] witnesses of crime—it's a bunch of crap. Victims and witnesses of crime don't want the bad guy back in their neighborhood either. So great progress.
We're there with the attorney general and local sheriffs. And one thing [is that] when we have these agreements, it takes less law enforcement agents to do the job. One agent can arrest one bad guy in the safety and security of a jail where he's behind the wire. We know he doesn't have weapons. But when you normally release that public safety threat—illegal alien—back into the community, we have a job to do. We're going to arrest him. So we're going to find him. And what happens is now we've got to arrest somebody on his turf. He has access to who knows what weapons. Now we've got to send the whole team out—cover the back door, cover the front door—for officer safety reasons. Then, because of the hateful rhetoric and the attacks on ICE officers, now we've got to send a security team behind the arrest team. So what could have been done with one person in the safety and security of a jail, now we've got 15, 16 people out there doing it.
I know that causes stress in the community. So if we get these agreements in place, that means less agents on the street. More agents in the jail means less agents in the street. This is common sense cooperation that allows us to draw down on the number of people we have here. Yes, I said it: draw down the number of people here because we have the efficiency and safety of the jails and the prison. Matter of fact, I have staff from CBP and ICE working on a draw-down plan. What does that look like based on the cooperation? What does that look like based on how many targets we have left to find? In my meetings with Governor Walz, AG Ellison, and Mayor Fry, as well as state and local law enforcement, again, I appreciate [that] they all acknowledge that we do have federal immigration laws in this country that have been passed by Congress and that ICE is in fact a legitimate law enforcement agency charged with enforcing those laws. We're not making this up, folks. ICE is enforcing laws enacted by Congress. They're in federal statute.
That said, I'm not here because the federal government has carried this mission out perfectly. The first thing I said to senior staff when I walked in here—that's what I told you—I didn't come here looking for ops or headlines. I came here looking for solutions. I do not want to hear that everything that's been done here has been perfect. Nothing's ever perfect, and anything can be improved on. And what we've been working on is making this operation safer, more efficient, by the book.
The mission is going to improve because of the changes we're making internally. No agency [or] organization is perfect. President Trump and I, along with others in the administration, have recognized that certain improvements could and should be made. That's exactly what I'm doing here. As such, in meetings I've had with federal law enforcement managers—including ICE and CBP and other federal partners—as well as state and local officials, I have conveyed the president's expectations with regard to federal immigration enforcement efforts. We will conduct targeted enforcement operations. Targeted—what we've done for decades. When we hit the streets, we know exactly who we're looking for [and have a] good idea where we may find them. You have a criminal history. You have their immigration history. A lot of information about this person that we get from numerous databases out there. Targeted, strategic enforcement operations. That's traditionally been the case, and that's where we're going. That's what we're going to continue to do and improve upon with the prioritization on public safety threats.
I want to be clear. I don't read a lot of social media. I don't read a lot of media. I can only believe half [of what] I see. We are not surrendering the president's mission in immigration enforcement. Let's make that clear. Prioritization of criminal aliens doesn't mean we forget about everybody else. That's just simply ridiculous. But when you have a criminal standing here and a noncriminal standing there, that criminal always should be targeted first because he's a significant concern to the safety and security of the community.
By and large, for decades, ICE and CBP have carried out their duties with integrity, professionalism, and compassion. That remains the expectation under President Trump, and I will hold our agents and officers to that standard....
As far as the agitators, I want to reiterate and make very clear: ICE and CBP officers are performing their duties in a challenging environment under tremendous circumstances, but they're trying to do it with professionalism. If they don't, they'll be dealt with. Like any other federal agency, we have standards of conduct. They are sworn law enforcement officers working tirelessly to enforce our country's border security [and] immigration laws, protecting the interests of our country, and preventing dangerous people from walking the streets of this nation when they're not supposed to be here to begin with.
Men and women of ICE: I was a Border Patrol agent. I was an ICE agent. I was the first ICE director [who] came up through the ranks. I spent over 40 years doing this. These men and women that carry that badge and gun are American patriots. They put themselves on the line for this nation every day. But I want you to remember: they don't hang their badge [or] their heart on the hook every day to come to work. They're mothers and fathers too. They're sons and daughters too. If they've seen a fraction of the tragedies I've seen in my career, they take a lot of that damage home every day. The things they've seen—especially on the border: people drowning in the river, women being raped by criminal cartels, giving CPR to a baby that was thrown in the river by the cartels because the Border Patrol came too close. So they throw the baby in the river—that way the Border Patrol is concentrated on that so [they] can get away. These men and women see some terrible things, but I want you to remember they're mothers and fathers too. Many of them are members of this community. God bless every one of them.
The hostile rhetoric and dangerous threats and hate must stop. And we all agreed to that. Everybody here today will tell you we've got to stop the hateful rhetoric that has caused an increase in assaults—that has caused us to send security teams out with arrest teams, which surges this city with additional resources because of the threats [and] because of the assaults.
Again, with the agreements we've achieved and [with] follow-through on the agreements, with the rhetoric dropping down, that allows us to pull more agents out once we feel the environment is safer. I begged for the last two months on TV for the rhetoric to stop. I said in March, if the rhetoric didn't stop, there's going to be bloodshed. And there has been. I wish I wasn't right. I don't want to see anybody die—not officers, not members of the community, and not the targets of our operations. For the people out there [who] don't like what ICE is doing: if you want certain laws reformed, take it up with Congress. Again, ICE is not making this up. They're enforcing laws enacted by Congress and signed by presidents.
The same laws have been on the books for the last six presidents I worked for—I started with President Reagan and [am] ending with President Trump. Every administration, we enforce the same laws. If you don't like what ICE is doing, instead of protesting this building, go protest Congress. Tell them what changes [you want]. You have your First Amendment rights. I support that. You have the right to protest. I'm just asking to keep it peaceful. But threatening law enforcement officers, engaging in impeding and obstruction, and assault is never okay. And there will be zero tolerance. You interfere, impede [or] assault ICE officers, you will be arrested.
Like I said a bit earlier, in my meetings with Governor Walz, Ellison, and Frey as well as state and local law enforcement, I appreciate [that] they acknowledge public safety should be paramount. The chiefs I've talked to committed to responding to 911 calls when protesters turn violent, [when] agents are in a dangerous situation and there's assaults. They have committed to upholding public safety and responding to the needs—not to enforce immigration law, but to keep the peace. With that, I call upon those officials to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with us to tone down the dangerous rhetoric and condemn all unlawful actions against law enforcement in the community....
President Trump wants this fixed, and I'm gonna fix it with your help....

232 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 232 of 232Mkd @4:12 and bagoh20@5:17, agree!
A note to Mkd: I haven't seen you comment before. If you're new to the site and not a longtime lurker, you may not be familiar with how RJW does his thing - by attempting to "set himself above the fray" and "draw greater principles" while starting from false premises (which was my initial point) and redefining terms to suit his purposes so that he can try to control and steer the discussion. In this case, he started from the false premise that the Trump administration was "lying" about the mission of ICE because they said they were "only" (as he implied but carefully refrained from saying, since the Trump administration has never said any such thing) going after criminals - that in fact the mission of ICE was "revolution."
Since then, he's been arguing that any effort of the Trump administration to affect public opinion is "propaganda and gaslighting" rather than, say, a more transparent kind of persuasion than the Obama administration employed when using its "nudge" strategy.
But maybe you've been here all along, see him for what he is, and are just playing along with his shtick - in which case, glad to meet you and you're a better man then I today!
Leftists are really playing a dangerous game. And they do not care.
"enforcement stops being neutral and becomes a mechanism for pursuing the manufactured enemies the cult has been groomed to believe exists"
*cough*J6*cough*
It's not freedom of speech to engage in planned action abuse, hinderance and harassment of law enforcement.
The open stated mission of the Walzian /Small Frey corrupt rage-fueled obedient left - is "revolution"
Beast, “revolution” wasn’t my quote. It was a quote I was asking for clarity of. I received that response loud and clear.
With the telling shooting videos, the lying ICE reporting, tanking polls, and the regime TACO moment, I get the mega MAGA meltdown and can appreciate this moment of despair. But maybe you could elaborate on this great vague and abstract “revolution discovery” which as I’ve repeatedly argued, was built on an abject lie.
Inga said...
“To solve the problem we need a coherent political strategy that includes disrupting progressive networks and better propaganda.”
In other words, you want the government to take away First Amendment speech from “disrupting progressives”?
How will that play in front of the Supreme Court?
Better than lying to the FISA court to spy on Trump.
Ronald J. Ward said...
Beast, “revolution” wasn’t my quote. It was a quote I was asking for clarity of. I received that response loud and clear.
With the telling shooting videos, the lying ICE reporting, tanking polls, and the regime TACO moment, I get the mega MAGA meltdown and can appreciate this moment of despair. But maybe you could elaborate on this great vague and abstract “revolution discovery” which as I’ve repeatedly argued, was built on an abject lie.
Pretti was spitting on ICE agents. He attacked agents on several occasions.
Have fun pushing your violent shithead nurse as a martyr.
just asking question, and venkman is clearly unable,
the maskirovna can hold for a while, with a compliant press
that enables the autopen, that wielded an autopen,
Ronald is struggling, so cut him some slack.
I am telling you, someone pulled Walz aside earlier this week and warned him that what he was doing was going to get him arrested for insurrection- it is literally what he and Frey have been engaged in by encouraging people to obstruct federal agents enforcing federal law. I imagine the same warning went down the Minnesota chain of law enforcement command, too, warning them that following Walz' lead was going to get them arrested, too. Preventing/arresting protestors' obstruction attempts is the job of local law enforcement under normal circumstances and actively not doing that job is also illegal.
I wrote here a few days back that the federal government can't back down under such threats like this- if the state and city governments won't act to protect federal agents from criminal behavior, it will be done under the Insurrection Act.
"How will that play in front of the Supreme Court?"
Especially KBJ, not being a linguist. No doubt, the concept of "speech" will be a challenge for her.
it's kind of cosplay, like a Marvel Film, but when the director calls cut, the results are very final
"Bloodthirsty communist revolutionaries have always made common cause with useful idiots.
Inside the lobby of a New York City Hilton Hotel on Tuesday evening, a group of protesters against Immigration and Customs Enforcement might have suddenly realized that they fall into the latter category.
“Kristi Noem will hang!” the revolutionaries chanted in a clip posted to the social media platform X."
------- ------- ------- ------- -------- ------- ------- ----- ----- -----
Ron Ward denies this is really happening.
Defund the police. It occurred to me today that most of that effort is to purge good officers and fill the voids with political loyalists. The Chief of Police in Minneapolis is a prime example.
Democrats are the mob.
’ Beast, “revolution” wasn’t my quote. It was a quote I was asking for clarity of. I received that response loud and clear.’
Which response did you hear loud and clear and from whom?
’With the telling shooting videos, the lying ICE reporting, tanking polls, and the regime TACO moment, I get the mega MAGA meltdown and can appreciate this moment of despair. But maybe you could elaborate on this great vague and abstract “revolution discovery” which as I’ve repeatedly argued, was built on an abject lie.’
No mega meltdown or despair from me or anyone I know, but if that framing grants you succor then please don’t let me interfere.
And I find your repeated and obsessive argument, re: your alleged ‘abject lie’, a bizarre red herring. Again, I hope it brings you some peace in the knowledge that you’ve found that elusive and important pony… lol
Jamie @ 6:05, I’ve never claimed the administration literally said “only criminals,” nor is my argument about wordplay. It’s about how the mission was framed and justified to the public — as neutral enforcement — and how that framing has since expanded to include political persuasion, network disruption, and narrative management. Calling that “transparent persuasion” doesn’t change what it is. You don’t need messaging campaigns or population-level pressure to arrest criminals with warrants. You need those tools when enforcement is being used to shape behavior and political outcomes. That distinction is the point, and it hasn’t been addressed here.
’That distinction is the point, and it hasn’t been addressed here.’
We should all stop what we’re doing and only focus on Ronald’s unhealthy obsession!! Because if he’s right, then?
1. Mission Framing
2. ???
3. Profit
Beast @ 6:26, the entire promise of mass deportations was that foreign prisons released hardened criminals who were coming here and those who already were here were eating our pets. While it wasn’t clear that the pet eaters were in the crosshairs, it was widely assumed these imaginary criminals were. That was all a lie.
Now we’re up to lie number 2 of some revolution, which you still seem to be unable to explain.
Ronald J. Ward lied...
the entire promise of mass deportations was that foreign prisons released hardened criminals who were coming here
From the Tom Homan transcript provided by our hostess
"... that county jails may notify ICE of the release dates of criminal public safety risks so ICE can take custody of them upon release from the jail."
The criminals that are deported are illegal aliens who have committed crimes in the United States (other than entering illegally). What they did back in their home country is irrelevant.
Oh, for heaven's sake, RJW, stop being so disingenuous! There was a reason I said that you had carefully avoided the word "only" with regard to whether the administration was going after criminal illegal aliens - it's exactly like the protesters themselves, shrieking their whistles and blowing their horns, claiming that what they're doing is warning "their neighbors" that ICE agents are nearby, but in fact grievously disrupting communications among armed law enforcement, which has already led to tragedy.
Stop being such a tool.
’Now we’re up to lie number 2 of some revolution, which you still seem to be unable to explain.’
Okay, let’s try it like this: let’s say everything you claim is true and you’ve found this magnificent ‘gotcha’, or proof of illegality, or an impeachable offense, or some constitutional crisis, or whatever, then shouldn’t you be thrilled? But, of course, you’re not. You’re in a state of high anxiety.
If I were on your side, I’d be silent about these alleged misdeeds, and let the noose tighten further, relishing in the future fallout!! But again, you’re not doing that. It makes no sense…
Christopher B said; “The criminals that are deported are illegal aliens who have committed crimes in the United States (other than entering illegally). What they did back in their home country is irrelevant.”
Well, you aren’t exactly wrong but that turd doesn’t shine. It’s hard to argue that criminals haven’t committed crimes. What seems to be the hard part for the MAGA crowd is that most are not criminals.
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2026/01/minnesota-georgia-fulton-county-trump-midterms-election-intereference-voter-rolls/
John, Jamie, Mkd, others: thanks for fighting the good fight and reinforcing my original comment. The responses you got are instructive in their way, aren't they?
We could use more sophisticated lefties around here.
Althouse used the potentially value-laden word “performance”. But was his manifestation before the cameras in Minnesota “performative” or more in the direction of “sincerative”?
Ronald J. Ward said...
Beast @ 6:26, the entire promise of mass deportations
Is that we want every illegal deported.
Doesn't matter why they came here, doesn't matter what they did in their home countries, we want them deported because they are foreign criminals (by definition, their coming here or over staying their visa here is a criminal act) and we want them gone.
Every single one, and their children too
"“U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement is a legitimate law enforcement agency“
When will they start wearing professional uniforms? It’s a small thing, but the Trump administration should stop dressing them like goons if they want to get public respect."
Can you imagine the reaction from the left when Trump appoints Hugo Boss to design the new uniforms ? I mean they do have experience in uniforms.
Greg @ 8:52 — I’ve argued, and will continue to argue until someone offers a substantive rebuttal, that calling for the removal of “every single one, and their children too” cannot honestly be grounded in criminality, even at the level of visa overstays. That framing collapses the moment it’s applied collectively and indiscriminately, especially to children. If this were truly about crime, individualized conduct would matter. It doesn’t here — and that’s the point many in the MAGA camp avoid engaging.
"What seems to be the hard part for the MAGA crowd is that most are not criminals."
If they are here illegally, Ronald, they are criminals by definition. If they ignore deportation orders, they are criminally doing so. I understand you wish to deny this reality but it won't work. There are two kinds of immigrants-those who are here legally and those who are not. Do you really deny this? It is fine to argue for a selective application of the law in this regard but it is not fine to argue that a strict application of the law is wrong. We voted for the strict application of the law and we won the election- elections have consequences. Change the law or win the White House in 2028- breaking the law by obstructing its application isn't the legal way forward.
There are two kinds of immigrants-those who are here legally and those who are not. Do you really deny this?
The left thinks it's okay for them to ignore laws they don't like. Not you, though.
Ronald J. Ward said...
Greg @ 8:52 — I’ve argued, and will continue to argue until someone offers a substantive rebuttal, that calling for the removal of “every single one, and their children too” cannot honestly be grounded in criminality, even at the level of visa overstays.
Your argument is complete and total shit, and has received many "substantive rebuttals", you've just ignored the,
You age is irrelevant. if you're here illegally, you need to leave. Who violated the law to get you here is irrelevant: if you're here illegally, it is a crime for you to stay, and you need to leave.
A white collar criminal who steals millions "to make a nice life for his family" goes to jail, and the millions he's stolen are taken away. Often leaving his family, including his entirely innocent kids, greatly harmed. No one tries to claim the kids shouldn't be kicked out of the home that's being repossessed, the schools dad can no longer afford, that they shouldn't lose the horse that's being sold to repay dad's fines.
That their family shouldn't "broken up" with dad sent off to prison.
It is not the slightest bit different with criminals who violate US immigration law instead of US fraud law.
So stop lying. Your position is that you are a King who is above the law and democracy, and you can throw out any law, any election result, that you don't like. No you can't, and only a complete and utter shit would take that position, We are going to enforce the law, and yo uahve no legitimate grounds to object, and no legitimate way to stop us.
You, and anyone else, can advocate, peacefully and non-obstructively, for Congress to change the law, and the president to sign that change.
But you can not stop the President from using the full power of the Executive Branch to enforce it, and you can not stop the people & departments of the Executive Branch from carrying out those orders
"We could use more sophisticated lefties around here."
Been saying it for years.
Post a Comment
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 4 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.