During the Biden administration, the FBI shot dead in his home a disabled elderly man for posting offensive messages about Biden on Facebook. Curiously, his name didn’t become widely known and nobody has expressed much interest in how justified the FBI was in claiming they were threatened by him. Clearly, some expansions of federal powers are more acceptable than others.
An Absent Scandal
Clarissa's Blog 
At least Biden wasn’t hiring 10k masked thugs to go around harassing and shooting at people.
LikeLike
No, he only brought in 10 million unmasked thugs to go harassing and shooting at people.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Both are bad. I can agree to that.
LikeLike
OK, but how do you remove the illegals without using law enforcement? If you don’t want the illegals, what’s an alternative way to make them leave?
LikeLike
One easy fix would be to debank them. We know this is possible because the Biden administration loved debanking right-wingers. Or hit the hospitality and farming sector but Trump already ruled that out. Instead all we’re getting is spectacle and no real results. There’s a reason they won’t release the deportation numbers.
LikeLike
Same way Obama did really.
There are ways to remove people, deter people, and make it difficult for people to come without going full authoritarian. These ICE shootings, covered faces, militarized gear, lack of training, low IQ hires, going through our neighbors hunting people is going to back fire badly and do the opposite of what it’s intended to do. A lot of Americans don’t take well to that kind of authoritarian militarized thuggery.
LikeLike
In all fairness, it’s not necessarily because how competent Obama was. It’s just that dem policies are carried out no questions asked by the state bureaucracy, no matter how flawed they are. And Trump’s policies get resisted every step of the way no matter how reasonable they are.
If Obama did indeed deport millions, why did we not see a SINGLE instance of a Federal judge issuing a stay order on even one of those cases? No judicial roadblocks, no bureaucratic obstacles, states largely cooperating with the feds. The system functioned smoothly and without interruption.
It’s still on Trump, though, to fix it. All we can do as voters is give our votes, and we gave this piece of shit party the presidence, the senate and the house. Now fucking do something with it.
LikeLike
Obama didn’t deport anybody. It’s an old, thoroughly debunked myth. He created fake deportation stats.
I had no idea anybody still believed the old “Obama Deporter in Chief” story. Wow, it’s such a blast from the past, this one.
Obama deported. Funny. Like, why would he deport anybody? Did he want his party to lose elections?
LikeLike
Who debunked this myth? And who reported on his fake deportation statistics?
LikeLike
Banned in Google, are we?
I asked AI and here’s the result:
The label “Deporter in Chief” attached to Barack Obama is widely described as unfair or misleading because it arose from a statistical and definitional shift, not from a uniquely harsh deportation agenda. Here’s how that label emerged and why many scholars and immigration experts argue it distorts reality.
A change in how deportations were counted
Before Obama, “deportation” (removal) statistics largely excluded people caught at the border and immediately turned back.
Under Obama, the Department of Homeland Security:
Started counting “expedited removals” and border returns as formal deportations
Included people apprehended near the border who previously would not have appeared in removal statistics
➡️ This inflated the numbers on paper, even though enforcement practices at the border were similar to prior administrations.
Key point: Obama didn’t suddenly invent mass deportation—he changed the accounting rules, making removals more transparent and comprehensive.
Interior deportations (people already living in the U.S.) dropped sharply in Obama’s second term
Yet the label stuck because:
Advocacy groups focused on cumulative totals
Headlines favored shocking numbers over context.
Why many experts say the label is misleading
Most immigration historians argue:
Obama normalized and documented deportation practices that already existed
He combined enforcement with the largest humanitarian relief programs since Reagan
His policies aimed at legal and moral triage, not blanket removal
So the label reflects optics and statistics, not intent or comparative severity.
LikeLike
“A lot of Americans don’t take well to that kind of authoritarian militarized thuggery.”
This used to be a basic conservative principle (“Don’t tread on me.”).
LikeLike
Since when did “me” include illegal migrants? Or do you suggest that it’s conservative to be against enforcing any laws?
And by the way, I saw this line about don’t tread on me to justify anti-ICE protests on social media today about 10 times. It’s a talking point. Let’s not do talking points because honestly.
LikeLike