Part 1 of this essay, which recounts ICE’s 22-year history, and Part 2, which described how Democrat party politics set the conditions for making Trump’s task exponentially more difficult, can be read here and here. Today Daniel Jupp explains where the ‘extremism’ is really coming from – it’s not the Trump administration.
THERE is a fundamental misapprehension in the UK about what is happening in the reported ICE confrontations and anti-ICE demonstrations. Unaware of the cynical reasons for Democrat support for open borders and illegal aliens, and suffused with mainstream media propaganda delegitimising ICE, many people conceive of all this as having been created by Trump administration extremism.
That is the exact opposite of reality. What occurred in the Biden years was extreme, and Trump is trying to restore the normal rule of law, which includes immigration law. The extremism now occurring is not from ICE, but from people called protesters, who have slipped gradually into a level of opposition and ‘resistance’ which now qualifies as outright insurrection and domestic terrorism.
Let’s look at what the US legal code says on domestic terrorism and how is it defined in existing law:
‘Under US federal law, specifically Title 18, Section 2331(5) of the US Code, domestic terrorism involves acts that are dangerous to human life, violate criminal law, and are intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population, influence government policy through intimidation, or affect government conduct through mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping – all occurring primarily within the U.S.
‘No law protects sitting or former politicians from prosecution if they commit crimes, including incitement to violence or terrorism.
‘Incitement to violence or threats of violence that meet the criteria of domestic terrorism – such as co-ordinated efforts to disrupt government functions, incite violence, or undermine democratic processes – could be prosecutable under federal statutes like seditious conspiracy (18 U.S.C. § 2384) or use of weapons of mass destruction (18 U.S.C. § 2332a).’
Acts that are dangerous to human life would include driving your car at ICE agents, or physically confronting ICE agents while armed with a loaded gun. It would potentially include all non-peaceful protest from words to physical acts of harassment, intimidation or violence, all of which we have seen in anti-Trump and anti-ICE protests. The wave of arson attacks aimed at Tesla, for example, when Elon Musk was working with the administration, clearly qualifies under this as domestic terrorism. Or the BLM riots in the first term, which resulted in more than 20 deaths, also meet this criterion of domestic terrorism.
These two examples illustrate why the current ICE protests should be seen as part of a repeated pattern of escalating violence, encouraged by Democrat leaders, and occurring whenever Trump is trying to enact the policies he was democratically elected to enact. The physical confrontations with ICE, which have included besieging ICE facilities, undermine democratic process by attempting to make it impossible for a legal deportation policy to be followed.This policy has an electoral mandate and is perfectly legal, making its obstruction through violence and intimidation illegal.
There is evidence, too, that the protests are highly orchestrated and organised by malign actors such as Neville Roy Singham reportedly funnelling millions of dollars into the US through organisations such as the Party for Socialism and Liberation, Democratic Socialists of America, and Minnesota Immigration Rights Action Committee. They meet the domestic terrorism legal definition of being ‘co-ordinated efforts to disrupt government functions’. Stopping ICE agents in the process of arresting criminals, in accordance with their long established duties, meets this criterion.
We aren’t seeing normal peaceful protest against ICE or against Trump but a controlled domestic terrorism campaign aimed at halting normal immigration enforcement. Newspaper articles and Democrat rhetoric demonising ICE are attempts both to disguise this activism and encourage more of it, becoming open incitements to violence in their own right.
Democrat and media depictions of Donald Trump and MAGA generally have long met the definition of ‘stochastic terrorism’, which is an academic term encompassing the kind of rhetoric which will encourage violence, social breakdown, sectarian conflict, and ultimately terrorist atrocities. Constantly demonising Trump, MAGA, Republicans or ICE by literally and seriously comparing them to Nazi Germany (as Robert Reich for example has done for years) radicalises the Democrat and progressive base and has a very significant role in the escalation of civil disobedience and violent protest the US has experienced.
If Trump is a fascist Nazi dictator, violent opposition becomes morally justified. Since he isn’t, and saying so represents an entirely delusional opinion, there can be only two explanations for saying it: either the person doing it is radicalised and extremist, or the person is trying to radicalise others. After so many violent anti-MAGA acts, including assassination attempts on Trump and the murder of Charlie Kirk, any rational and responsible person should know exactly where this rhetoric leads and why it is dangerous.
And yet even following Kirk’s death there was no acknowledgement of this. If anything has been shown by the anti-ICE propaganda, it is that such rhetoric has increased and is now voiced by supposed right-wingers as well as by hard left activists. Extraordinarily cynical and irresponsible reporting describes trying to prevent deaths like that of Laken Riley (discussed yesterday) as Nazism. Such moral obscenity and factual inaccuracy is now a commonplace article of faith for millions of people, completely normalised by the media.
What we also see is that the confrontations that arise in response to all this propaganda occur most in areas under Democrat administration and, most of all, in Minnesota. Why is this?
Well, this is where massive levels of corruption, electoral fraud and electoral pacts with illegal immigrant communities, and Democrat determination to destroy Trump by any means, all meet. We see this in the full context of who governs Minnesota, and how it is governed.
Minnesota is a Democrat Party fiefdom. Its governor is Tim Walz, the former running mate of Kamala Harris and Democrat Party candidate for Vice President in the 2024 election. Walz was elected in Minnesota on a joint ticket with Democrat Lieutenant Governor Peggy Flanagan. Its two Senators are both Democrats (Amy Klobuchar and Tina Smith). Its two largest employers are the Mayo Clinic and the State itself (both health workers and government employees lean heavily leftist in voting). Its Secretary of State, Steve Simon, is a Democrat, and its Attorney General, Keith Ellison, is a Democrat, as is its State Auditor, Julie Blaha. Its Chief Justice, Natalie E Hudson, was appointed by Walz but doesn’t publicly identify as a Democrat. Minnesota’s congressional representatives include the notorious and extreme Ilhan Omar.
Since 2018 Minnesota has had proportionately the largest immigrant population of any US State. It is a major centre of refugee resettlement. It has 2 per cent of the overall population of the US, and 13 per cent of the total immigrant population of the US.
Related to this is the leftist insistence on large state-controlled welfare programmes running alongside large immigrant communities, and the opportunities for vast theft both provide. Citizen journalism from Nick Shirley, a 27-year-old YouTuber, exposed a vast Somalian fraud centred in false claims by imaginary or crooked day care centres and Somalian families claiming autism benefits and support they were not entitled to. Confirmed fraud in this case is in the region of $1billion (£730million). Estimates are now suggesting that the US taxpayer might have been ripped off to the tune of $19billion (£14billion) as fraudulent schemes continue to be discovered.
Three weeks ago the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform issued a press release that began like this: ‘Today, the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform held a hearing titled Oversight of Fraud and Misuse of Federal Funds in Minnesota: Part I. Criminals in Minnesota have stolen an estimated $9billion [£6.6millon] in taxpayer funds intended to feed children, support autistic children, house low-income and disabled Americans, and provide healthcare to vulnerable Medicaid recipients. Members of Congress and the Minnesota state lawmakers who testified described how many of these schemes were concentrated within the Minnesota’s Somali community, with some taxpayer dollars diverted to terrorist networks overseas. State lawmakers testified that Governor Tim Walz and Attorney General Keith Ellison failed to take action to address this widespread fraud and have retaliated against whistleblowers who raised concerns. As the Trump Administration continues its efforts to hold those responsible accountable, Congress must also pursue legislative solutions to better protect American taxpayers.’
Since the exposure of this vast Somalian fraud in Minnesota, Shirley has received death threats and now requires 24/7 security protection. ICE efforts in Minnesota were partly in response to the fraud and criminality by Somalians Shirley had exposed (it is their job to arrest and deport illegals committing crimes, and vast crimes had been revealed).
The need for ICE to intervene in Minnesota was startlingly obvious given the likelihood of a large number of illegals there, a substantial number of whom are engaged in criminal acts. We can also see why a Democrat administration accused of being complicit in such crimes would prefer to cast ICE as Nazis and themselves as protectors of innocent refugees rather than have people aware of this scale of fraud, their lack of oversight and their abnegation of responsibility.
Minnesota is the model of what kind of crimes come from a political system where one party benefits from open borders, illegal immigration and fraud. In this case illegal immigrants have enabled Democrat electoral fraud, and Democrats in turn have enabled the welfare fraud of illegal migrants.
In the final part of the series tomorrow I speculate on the motivations behind the protests, the planned scale of insurrection and the globalist mission to keep borders open that stand behind it.
