To my reading, it looks like he is correcting the implication that his lawsuit is about abolishing ICE rather than getting ICE out of his city, and he spoke hanfistedly in light of his audience. A bit dumb but he seems to have conducted himself well and the overall message that his lawsuit isn’t what Fox has been claiming it is comes through very clearly.
Jenkins asked Frey whether he supports abolishing ICE in their interview, which will air in full on Wednesday at 8 a.m. EST.
“I do not support abolishing ICE,” Frey said. “However, I absolutely oppose the way that this administration is conducting themselves with ICE. Look, there are a number of entities presently, agencies at the federal government that are–"
Why are we taking things said by people on our side while on a literal fascist propaganda network at face value (is it reasonable if pointless for them to go on fox, maybe? They are the largest “news” group in the US and we do need to reach their viewers, even if it’s just one or two it does matter)
“I don’t support abolishing the Gestapo, I just wish they would conduct themselves better”
Focusing on how the aesthetics of the harm is perceived, instead of having issue with the fundamental harm, is not left or progressive in any capacity. It’s the same bullshit as liberal Zionism, just the US version.
If he doesn’t support abolishing the Gestapo, he doesn’t have much issue with the harm they cause when it isn’t on the front page.
ICE is a fascist organization, he doesn’t support getting rid of it, he only supports toning the violence down a notch. Otherwise, he would support abolishing ICE
If he doesn’t vocally support it on a fascist propaganda network, then clearly there’s no hope?
ICE is a fascist organization, he doesn’t support getting rid of it, he only supports toning the violence down a notch. Otherwise, he would support abolishing ICE
You don’t actually have evidence that this accurately represents his position - and let me remind you that the only evidence you do have is an out of context quote from Fox News that you are using to condemn someone. You’re just reacting to someone who, in the representation that once again was provided by FOX NEWS, does not meet your standards for what constitutes being progressive.
Jenkins asked Frey whether he supports abolishing ICE in their interview, which will air in full on Wednesday at 8 a.m. EST.
“I do not support abolishing ICE,” Frey said. “However, I absolutely oppose the way that this administration is conducting themselves with ICE. Look, there are a number of entities presently, agencies at the federal government that are—”
“But isn’t that what your lawsuit is about, stopping ICE right now?” Jenkins interrupted.
“No, you should read the lawsuit,” Frey said. “The lawsuit says that, hey, you know — ICE doing ICE stuff is not what we’re talking about right now. Again, we’ve had ICE in our city before, we’ve had ICE in our state before. It is the fact that, look, right now, there are, there’s about 3,000 federal ICE agents in our city between ICE and Border Patrol. You know how many police officers that we have? 600. The kind of duress that our city is experiencing because of this is magnified.”
He explicitly says he does not support abolishing ICE. If you can find any evidence that this that isn’t his position, please share. I haven’t been able to find any.
From what I can find, it seems like his issues with ICE is that they aren’t doing the ethnic cleansing campaigns the legal way, and are causing too much unrest with their show of force. But maybe I missed something
Seems like he doesn’t have a problem with how ICE has operated in Minneapolis in the past, but only now, because there’s been enough public pushback
What point? You said that the quote was out of context and not representative of his actual views. You didn’t provide anything to support that point. I looked for any more context and found none. I found nothing to indicate this his actual view is contrary to his statements.
What’s with this waffle vs. pancake sentiment? “Get out of my house, I don’t want you here” is not "Get out of my house and go to someone else’s instead".
This was taken from a Fox News interview, so it’s safe to conclude it’s going to be heavily manipulated to force whatever conclusion Fox wants for it’s viewers.
To my reading, it looks like he is correcting the implication that his lawsuit is about abolishing ICE rather than getting ICE out of his city, and he spoke hanfistedly in light of his audience. A bit dumb but he seems to have conducted himself well and the overall message that his lawsuit isn’t what Fox has been claiming it is comes through very clearly.
Why are we taking things said by people on our side while on a literal fascist propaganda network at face value (is it reasonable if pointless for them to go on fox, maybe? They are the largest “news” group in the US and we do need to reach their viewers, even if it’s just one or two it does matter)
Focusing on how the aesthetics of the harm is perceived, instead of having issue with the fundamental harm, is not left or progressive in any capacity. It’s the same bullshit as liberal Zionism, just the US version.
That isn’t the aesthetics of the harm being perceived as the criticism though, that’s direct criticism of the harm and the methods used to do it.
If he doesn’t support abolishing the Gestapo, he doesn’t have much issue with the harm they cause when it isn’t on the front page.
ICE is a fascist organization, he doesn’t support getting rid of it, he only supports toning the violence down a notch. Otherwise, he would support abolishing ICE
If he doesn’t vocally support it on a fascist propaganda network, then clearly there’s no hope?
You don’t actually have evidence that this accurately represents his position - and let me remind you that the only evidence you do have is an out of context quote from Fox News that you are using to condemn someone. You’re just reacting to someone who, in the representation that once again was provided by FOX NEWS, does not meet your standards for what constitutes being progressive.
From the interview
Jenkins asked Frey whether he supports abolishing ICE in their interview, which will air in full on Wednesday at 8 a.m. EST.
“I do not support abolishing ICE,” Frey said. “However, I absolutely oppose the way that this administration is conducting themselves with ICE. Look, there are a number of entities presently, agencies at the federal government that are—”
“But isn’t that what your lawsuit is about, stopping ICE right now?” Jenkins interrupted.
“No, you should read the lawsuit,” Frey said. “The lawsuit says that, hey, you know — ICE doing ICE stuff is not what we’re talking about right now. Again, we’ve had ICE in our city before, we’ve had ICE in our state before. It is the fact that, look, right now, there are, there’s about 3,000 federal ICE agents in our city between ICE and Border Patrol. You know how many police officers that we have? 600. The kind of duress that our city is experiencing because of this is magnified.”
He explicitly says he does not support abolishing ICE. If you can find any evidence that this that isn’t his position, please share. I haven’t been able to find any.
From what I can find, it seems like his issues with ICE is that they aren’t doing the ethnic cleansing campaigns the legal way, and are causing too much unrest with their show of force. But maybe I missed something
Seems like he doesn’t have a problem with how ICE has operated in Minneapolis in the past, but only now, because there’s been enough public pushback
Yeah I’m not seeing much point in continuing this conversation, you’re almost aggressively not engaging with my point.
What point? You said that the quote was out of context and not representative of his actual views. You didn’t provide anything to support that point. I looked for any more context and found none. I found nothing to indicate this his actual view is contrary to his statements.
So didja find anything else to support this being his position?
Because tankies
Wait you think I’m a tankie? Or is that what you call anybody who hates the state of America right now?
So nimbyism
What’s with this waffle vs. pancake sentiment? “Get out of my house, I don’t want you here” is not "Get out of my house and go to someone else’s instead".
“get out of my house but continue doing what you do” is the latter.
Again, that’s not what’s happening here. That’s a whole new concept.