The Trump Administration Says It’s Illegal To Record Videos of ICE. Here’s What the Law Says.

The lawless tRump and criminal gang Gestapo thugs in ICE do not want to be held accountable.  They are demanding they have the right to lie and you must believe it.  They think they would be allowed to get away with everything and anything to harm and terrorize people if no can see what they do.   So they try to convince you it is a crime to record them.  It is not a crime.  But remember how racist cops tried to do the same thing after the George Floyd murder?  We must not let them take our rights away from us and we must fight against the tyrannical dictatorship of a lawless government ruling a powerless public.  Hugs

https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/trump-administration-says-illegal-record-110053452.html

C.J. Ciaramella
The Trump Administration Says It’s Illegal To Record Videos of ICE. Here’s What the Law Says.

The Trump administration believes you don’t have the right to record Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers in public. This stance is both factually wrong and an attempt to chill free speech by conflating it with violence.

At a July 2025 press conference in Tampa, Florida, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem said, “Violence is anything that threatens them and their safety, so it is doxing them, it’s videotaping them where they’re at when they’re out on operations, encouraging other people to come and to throw things, rocks, bottles.”

In September 2025, DHS Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs Tricia McLaughlin called “videotaping ICE law enforcement and posting photos and videos of them online” a form of doxing. She added, “We will prosecute those who illegally harass ICE agents to the fullest extent of the law.”

These aren’t idle threats. The Trump administration strong-armed Apple into removing an app from its mobile store that tracked ICE activity and threatened criminal investigations into its creators.

The most aggressive application of this policy has come in Chicago under “Operation Midway Blitz,” where ICE officers have relentlessly targeted protesters, reporters, and clergy engaged in protected First Amendment activity.

In October, a group of journalists and protesters filed a lawsuit alleging “a pattern of extreme brutality in a concerted and ongoing effort to silence the press and civilians.”

In court filings, the plaintiffs stated that federal officials’ own testimony illustrated their point. For example, when ICE field director Russell Hott was asked if he agreed “that it’s unconstitutional to arrest people for being opposed to Midway Blitz,” he answered “No.”

“Similarly, [U.S. Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Greg] Bovino testified that he has instructed his officers to arrest protesters who make hyperbolic comments in the heat of political demonstrations, even though such statements—which do not constitute true threats—are protected speech,” the motion argued. (Hott and Bovino’s depositions were filed under seal, and those comments were later redacted in a corrected filing by the lawsuit plaintiffs, but not before others took screenshots of them.)

Based on voluminous evidence that feds in Chicago ignored her previous orders to curb their use of force, U.S. District Court Judge Sara Ellis issued a preliminary injunction against DHS in early November 2025, saying the government’s conduct “shocked the conscience.”

Ellis found much of the officials’ testimony not credible. Bovino, for instance, testified that he never used force against a protester he was filmed tackling, and in another instance, Ellis said, he lied about being hit with a rock before firing tear gas at demonstrators. Nor did evidence support the government’s claims that federal officers issued warnings before firing less-than-lethal projectiles at those protesters.

“Describing rapid response networks and neighborhood moms as professional agitators shows just how out of touch these agents are, and how extreme their views are,” said Ellis.

The Trump administration responded by calling Ellis an “activist judge,” but it is squarely wrong when it comes to recording and protesting the police. Cato Institute senior fellow Walter Olson points out that, “While the Supreme Court itself hasn’t yet faced the issue squarely, the seven federal circuits that have done so…all agree that the First Amendment protects the right to record police performing their duties in public.”

Likewise, federal circuits have upheld the right to use vulgar language to oppose police without fear of retaliation, and to warn others of nearby police checkpoints or speed traps.

As Olson writes, the administration’s “attempt to alter reality by establishing new legal facts on the ground” ultimately serves as a green light for informal repression. “If the agents come to believe that they have blanket immunity [for] whatever they do, or that citizens have no right to record them, they are more likely to take aggressive informal action, such as grabbing phones or taking news reporters into custody on charges of obstruction (perhaps later quietly dropped).”

It’s not hard to find examples of this rotten agency culture in practice. In late October 2025, ICE officers broke out the window of a U.S. citizen’s car and detained her for seven hours after she followed and photographed their unmarked vehicles. DHS accused her of reckless driving, attempting to block in officers with her car, and resisting arrest—all claims that she and her lawyer deny. Prosecutors did not charge the woman with a crime.

Recording government agents is one of the few tools citizens have to hold state power accountable. Any attempt to redefine observation as “violence” is not only unconstitutional—it’s authoritarian gaslighting. When a government fears cameras more than crimes, it isn’t protecting the rule of law. It’s protecting itself.

The post The Trump Administration Says It’s Illegal To Record Videos of ICE. Here’s What the Law Says. appeared first on Reason.com.

Trump push to politicize US military ‘reminiscent of Stalin’, top general warns

 

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/jan/05/trump-us-military-hegseth-stalin

a man in military fatigues looks aheadPaul Eaton in Baghdad in June 2004. Eaton spent 37 years in active service.  Photograph: Brent Stirton/Getty Images

Donald Trump and his defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, are mounting an aggressive push to politicise the top ranks of the US military – a push that smacks of Stalinism and could take years to repair, the former infantry chief who trained troops to invade Iraq has warned.

Maj Gen Paul Eaton has sounded the alarm, saying in an interview with the Guardian that the effort to bend the higher echelons of the military to the US president’s will was unparalleled in recent history and could have long-term dire consequences. He warned that both the reputation and efficiency of the world’s most powerful fighting force was in the balance.

“There is an active effort to politicise the armed forces,” Eaton said. “Once you infect the body, the cure may be very difficult and painful for presidents downstream.”

He added that the actions of Trump and his chosen head of the Pentagon were putting the standing of the military as an independent entity, free from party politics, at risk. “As the phrase goes, reputation is built a drop at a time and emptied in buckets.”

Eaton, 75, has spent his entire life in military circles, including 37 years in active service. His father was an air force pilot whose B-57 bomber was shot down over Laos in 1969, when Eaton was 18.

Air force Col Norman Eaton’s remains were found and identified in 2006.

Eaton himself trained at West Point, the US military academy in New York that trains commissioned officers, graduating soon after the end of the Vietnam war. He rose through the ranks of the US army to infantry chief and then, after the initial invasion of Iraq in 2003 was completed, was sent to that country to rebuild the Iraqi armed forces.

In recent years Eaton has been a sharp critic of Trump’s manipulation of military structures. In the summer of 2024 he participated in war games conducted by the Brennan Center for Justice thinktank, that sought to anticipate the then Republican nominee Trump’s most dangerous authoritarian moves were he to return to the White House.

Many of the actions predicted in those tabletop exercises – including politicisation of the military and other key government institutions, and deployment of the national guard into Democratic-controlled cities – have already come to pass under Trump’s second presidency.

In Eaton’s analysis, Trump’s first step towards compromising military independence was the act of appointing Hegseth as secretary of defense. The former Fox & Friends host had been an adviser to Trump and had supported his first presidential run in 2016.

“Hegseth not only swears loyalty to Trump, he swears fealty to Trump – whereas the military swears an oath to the constitution,” Eaton said.

Soon after Hegseth was ensconced in the Pentagon the firings began. Within a week of Trump’s inauguration the military inspector general who acted as an independent watchdog was dismissed, followed by the top military lawyers (judge advocates general) who advise on the laws of armed conflict.

Out, too, went the top officers. Charles Brown, chair of the joint chiefs of staff, was ousted in February and replaced by Lt Gen Dan Caine who Trump claimed had express his love for the president and would “kill for him” (Caine denied ever saying such things). The top officers in the navy and air force were ditched in quick succession.

The Pentagon purge sent a clear and chilling message that reverberated throughout the military services, Eaton said. “Toe the line, or we will fire you. You’re in a different world now. This is Trump’s world, and by God, this is what we’re going to do.”

The dismissals also sowed doubt throughout the ranks. Would senior officers kowtow to Trump and his defense secretary? Or would they stand up for following the military rules of engagement?

Eaton said the effect reminded him of Joseph Stalin’s 1940s purges of the top officers in Soviet forces. “Stalin killed a lot of the best and brightest of the military leadership, and then inserted political commissars into the units. The doubt that swept the armed forces of the Soviet Union is reminiscent of today – they are not killing these men and women, but they are removing them from positions of authority with similar impact.”

The end result, Eaton said, was that “you’ve got a 1940s Stalin problem inside the American military right now”.

The furor over the lethal US military strikes on boats in Latin American waters is for Eaton a sign of the damage that is being wrought. The administration claims the strikes have been targeted on “narco-terrorists” who are in “armed conflict” with the US by bringing illegal drugs into the country.

The first of more than 20 strikes that have occurred took place on 2 September. It involved a controversial second strike that killed two survivors who had been clinging to the bombed wreck of the boat.

The Washington Post revealed that Hegseth had given an order to “kill everybody”. Under the Department of Defense manual on the laws of war, it is forbidden to order that every combatant must be killed irrespective of whether they pose a threat.

Eaton has no doubts about the illegality of the 2 September second strike. “It was either a war crime or a murder. So we have a real problem here. This decision looks a whole lot like a U-boat commander machine gunning victims in the water during world war two.”

Hegseth sought to drive home the new way of doing things in a bizarre summit in September in which he gathered military commanders to Quantico in Virginia. He berated them about so-called wokeness, liberal thinking, and the presence of “fat generals and admirals in the halls of the Pentagon”.

Anyone in the room who disagreed with him was encouraged to resign.

For Eaton, the meeting was “disgusting” and “antithetical to the US military. The senior leadership of our armed forces are sober people who do not speak in terms of fatness or ‘kill them all’ or ‘the gloves are off’.”

Looking ahead to 2026, Eaton is profoundly concerned that the violations of rules of war that have arguably been committed by the Pentagon outside US territory might soon become a reality domestically. The Trump administration has federalised national guard troops and sent them into numerous cities against the wishes of Democratic mayors and state governors.

The presence of national guard soldiers in Los Angeles, Washington DC, the Chicago area and other locations has been challenged in federal courts, where cases continue to play out.

In October Eaton took part in a delegation that included the organisation Vote Vets, to which he acts as an adviser, to see the Democratic governor of Illinois, JB Pritzker. The retired two-star general said they counseled Pritzker to stand firm in countering troop deployment to Chicago.

“We told him: you have a requirement to protect your citizens from federal assault.”

Eaton’s biggest fear is at some point a dramatic clash of forces might take place, with the federalised national guard facing off against state and local police. He conjured up the imaginary scenario of the Texas national guard being federalised – ie ordered out of state control into national control – and imported into Baltimore, Maryland, contrary to the city and state’s wishes.

“What could go wrong?” Eaton said. “You can very easily see an escalation in which both sides think they are right, obeying orders that they believe were given legally.”

Sooner or later, he warned, a “memorable event” was likely to take place. “There are going to be people getting hurt who really don’t need to get hurt.”

 

1,000+ protests nationwide after ICE shooting in MN

 

 

Trump claims prices are ‘way down’ in rant on economy: ‘We’ve done a great job on the word affordability’

tRump has never purchased anything personally like normal people.  He doesn’t go to stores and shop.  He has always been a pampered rich boy even in bankruptcy.  I don’t know about anyone else but Ron and I have to stretch our first half of the month income to be able to afford groceries and medications.   We ended last month with $30 in the checking account.  This month is always bad for us.  So I want to know where this lowering of costs are.  Ron wears me and the car outgoing from store to store to get the best deals.  We suffer in too cold or too warm a house to keep the electric bill down.  But yes Florida is a high cost of living state, would love to move, but … yup we can’t afford it.  Hugs.


https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/donald-trump-prices-affordability-oil-b2897356.html

Donald Trump’s claims about bringing down prices comes just weeks after he told families to limit the number of presents that they buy for their children

 
Donald Trump claimed that “prices are way down” for Americans in a new interview touting his apparent economic success.

The president said his administration was doing a “great job on the word ‘affordability’” despite claiming just weeks ago that the word was a “hoax” created by the Democratic Party.

Trump made the claims while speaking to Sean Hannity on his eponymous Fox News show.

“We have gasoline now down to, in many cases, $1.99 a gallon,” Trump said. “With Biden, it was $4.50, $5.

“We have it way, way…We have…,” he continued, repeatedly trailing off. “We’ve brought it way down.

“We’ve done a great job on the word ‘affordability,’ prices are way down,” he concluded. “They need to go lower. Everything follows oil. Oil is so big.”

Donald Trump has claimed that prices are ‘way down’ in a new interview on Fox News’s Hannity

Donald Trump has claimed that prices are ‘way down’ in a new interview on Fox News’s Hannity (The White House)

However, fuel prices are actually much higher than the figure given by the president.

According to the most recent report from the US Energy Information Administration, the cost of a gallon of oil at the start of 2026 was $2.8. That is nearly a dollar more expensive than the number given by Trump.

Meanwhile, the Consumer Price Index indicated that the average cost for all items has increased actually increased during Trump’s presidency, despite him suggesting that prices are “way down.”

According to the CPI, the average cost of goods rose by 2.7 percent from November 2024 until November 2025.

The CPI also found that average cost of food had risen by 2.6 percent, although that increased was dwarfed by the cost of energy skyrocketing by 4.2 percent.

Oil prices did drop recently, though, after Trump suggested that there would be an upcoming surge in supply. According to him, Venezuela will soon be giving up to 50 million barrels of crude to the United States.

The deal, thought to be close to $2 billion in value, comes after Trump launched a military operation against the South American petrostate and kidnapped its president, Nicolás Maduro.

Statistics from the BLS suggest that prices have actually increased and that people have been forced to take second jobs

Statistics from the BLS suggest that prices have actually increased and that people have been forced to take second jobs (Getty)

Speaking about the impact of his economic policies in December, Trump awarded himself with an “A+++++” rating.

That same month, he dismissed the very concept of affordability as a “hoax” during a rally.

“They have a new word,” he said, referring to the Democratic Party. “You know, they always have a hoax. The new word is ‘affordability.’”

Despite that, Trump seemingly acknowledged that commercial goods were becoming more expensive. He told struggling families, who were preparing for Christmas, that they should be content with buying “one or two” pencils for their children and “two or three” dolls to keep costs low.

Trump’s optimistic view on prices comes just days after new figures from the BLS, seen by The Washington Post, revealed that more Americans than ever have been forced to take second jobs to make ends meet.

According to the BLS, 9.3 million people are now working multiple jobs, smashing the previous record high, which was 8.9 million. The previous high was reached in March 2025, just months after Trump’s second term began.

The report also found that Trump had created just 67,000 jobs in the last three months, which is eight times fewer jobs than the number generated by former President Joe Biden in the same period.

 

 

Let’s talk about Trump’s $1.5 Trillion Defense Budget and what it might mean for NATO….

Let’s talk about Trump’s Venezuela dreams collapsing….

Let’s talk about Trump needing a map and the ‘hard way’….

 

Trump Targets West Wing for Next White House Construction Project

tRump is using the people’s house, the house for the president while he is in office as if it was one of his own properties.   Like he was always going to stay there.   He is acting like the White House should be a palace like the Saudi royalty or the English kings / queens.  He wants the place to be spectacle and pomp instead of what it really is for, a work place for the president to live and work.  He also spends the public treasury paid for by the taxpayer as his own private checking account when the laws say that is illegal.  Congress approves the budget not the president, but the republicans in congress are too afraid of him to even say anything.   I bet you they find their voice if a democrat wins the presidency.  Hugs.  

https://www.newsweek.com/trump-targets-west-wing-next-white-house-construction-project-11334169

Aliss Higham
By Aliss Higham

US News Reporter

President Donald Trump is continuing his renovations of the White House with potential new additions to the West Wing.

After demolishing the White House’s East Wing to make way for a new ballroom in 2025, Trump is now setting his sights on the colonnade linking the West Wing to the executive residence, where he wants to add a second level.

The administration unveiled the plan during a meeting of the National Capital Planning Commission in Washington this week.

Newsweek has contacted the White House for comment via email.

Why It Matters

The White House announced the East Wing ballroom project in late July, with demolition beginning in October, when workers were seen tearing it down.

The White House has said the project will be funded by private donations and no taxpayer burden, though the projected cost has increased from an estimate of $200 million to $400 million.

 

New Renovation Plans

In an interview with The New York Times on Wednesday, Trump said he was calling the project the “Upper West Wing.” He said it was still in the design phase and that the space could be used for additional West Wing offices or serve as “first ladies’ offices for future first ladies.” These were previously in the East Wing.

The project’s architect, Shalom Baranes, said the White House was weighing up the one-story addition to the West Wing to restore what he described as the complex’s “symmetry” once the East Wing ballroom was finished.

Architect Shalom Baranes shows elevation drawings for a new $400 million ballroom at the White House to members of the National Capital Planning Commi… | Chip Somodevilla/Getty

“I did mention the potential for a future addition, a one-story addition to the West Wing,” Baranes told the commission. “The reason to think about that is so that we would reinstate symmetry along the central pavilion of the White House.”

He made the remarks after unveiling plans for a two-story colonnade that would link the East Room to the new ballroom. The ballroom is set to be about 22,000 square feet and designed to accommodate 1,000 seated guests.

In a statement released in July, the White House said the “much-needed and exquisite addition” would add “approximately 90,000 total square feet of ornately designed and carefully crafted space, with a seated capacity of 650 people—a significant increase from the 200-person seated capacity in the East Room of the White House.”

Backlash

The overall renovation plans have been met with some backlash in recent months.

In December, the National Trust for Historic Preservation filed a lawsuit to stop the East Wing project, saying the administration had dodged a required review process for federal projects. During a hearing in the case, the administration told a federal judge it would submit the project’s plans to the appropriate federal oversight bodies. The judge said he would schedule a follow-up hearing in January to review the White House’s process and declined to halt construction in the meantime.

The trust said following the meeting on Thursday: “Today’s NCPC informational presentation about the White House ballroom was a good and necessary first step. The National Trust continues to urge the Administration to comply with all legally required review and approval processes before commencing construction, including the NCPC, the Commission of Fine Arts, compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act, and approval by Congress.”

It added that it looked “forward to the American people having a voice in the process moving forward.”

Political cartoons / memes / and news I want to share. 1-11-2026

Image from Assigned Male

Image from Assigned Male

Image from Assigned Male

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

political cartoon

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

image

The soul of MAGA/ICE writ large.

 

 

 

 

Jimmy Margulies for 1/9/2026

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mike Smith for 1/9/2026

 

 

 

Lee Judge for 1/9/2026

 

 

 

 

 

Joey Weatherford for 1/9/2026

Joey Weatherford for 1/8/2026

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

After a long day of doing posting, getting stuff correct, starting supper and then this song landed in my YouTube feed.

OK everyone tired of myself pushing / punishing posts about my childhood please skip this one.  I won’t be talking much about my abuse only in vague terms.   I am very tired, got up early to take care of the cat and been doing as much as I could all day.  But I was OK, when my back gave out I let Ron do the dishes while I dried them so we could have the supper I made.  It was a pork tender lion seasoned my way, mashed potatoes, green beans, and brown gravy.  By the time that Ron was done, I was exhausted and hardly able to stand up, so he took over washing while I dried the few remaining dishes.  

Then when I finished eating and got back to blogging.  That was when YouTube slammed me with the song I will put at the bottom.  The song is about a man and child abandoned by the mother as she got wealthy.  But in my case when I did talk to my sires kids they told me why the little boy that was so shortly in their home and disappeared never to be spoken of.  Seems that my sire’s wife said she wouldn’t tolerate another one of his off spring with other women to live in their house.  She was already raising several of his children from women not her, and she was going to pull the line here.  The little boy who already knew to hide and not be seen did not come into her concern at all.  According to her daughter she was not a really nice person as she tried to pretend to the world she was.  She simply did not care what happened to me as long as I was not in HER house nor taking her husband’s time away from her own kids.  I asked my real sibling if the wife knew what would happen to me, and she said yes but she was willing to have it happen rather than take me into her home.  I still have the letter and it causes me to cry each time, that an adult knew what I was going to face but simply did not care as raising me safety was more work for her and a reminder of her husband fucking other women.  

So the song.  All that glitters is not gold.  I often wondered what would have happened to me if I had been raised in that family instead of the abusive one I did.   But would it have been as abusive in the house of my sire as in the house of my adopting rapists?  My sister from that family thinks in some ways yes.  No I wouldn’t have been raped but I would have been blamed for everything wrong, I might have been disciplined very harshly, and yes made the scape goat of everything wrong in the family … if the man who sired me had let her do it.  All just too scary and hurtful.  A little boy sold to abusers because adults couldn’t reconcile where and how they used their private parts.  I will place the song below and you can tell me if my tears were worth it.   Hugs.