Posts

Stephen Miller, Not (Just) Kristi Noem and Greg Bovino, Must Be Held Accountable

Bill Melugin, whom I call the Fox News Chief Deportation Propagandist (though he has been moved to cover Congress) was the person who first reported that Alex Pretti had a weapon.

Around 56 minutes after CBP killed Pretti at 9:02 AM CT, so 3:02 IT, they had already gotten Melugin this picture (and in the process proven that they were not securing evidence from the crime scene, which damning fact Melugin has never, AFAIK, pointed out).

Among the lies that Melugin disseminated after the murder were that:

  • The person CBP was snatching was “an illegal alien wanted for violent assault”
  • That Pretti “approached US Border Patrol officers with a 9 mm semi-automatic handgun”
  • “[T]he armed suspect violently resisted”
  • “Medics on scene immediately delivered medical aid to the subject”
  • “[T]his looks like a situation where an individual wanted to do maximum damage and massacre law enforcement”
  • “200 rioters arrived at the scene”

Plus, there’s no sign that CBP ever looked for an ID, so I suspect we may one day confirm that DHS claims Pretti had no ID will be proven false.

The Star Tribune debunked most of these lies.

As to the claim that the target of the operation was “wanted for violent assault”? The MN Department of Corrections has launched a dedicated website to correcting DHS lies, including a press release explaining that the guy Greg Bovino claimed they were pursuing had, in fact, been released by ICE during Trump’s first term.

In the hours following the shooting, U.S. Border Patrol Chief Gregory Bovino held a press conference asserting that the operation was targeting an individual named Jose Huerta-Chuma and characterized him as having a significant criminal history. Because federal statements have repeatedly included inaccurate information about Minnesota custody and criminal records, the DOC reviewed available records to determine whether the individual referenced had any connection to Minnesota state prison custody.

Based on DOC records and publicly available Minnesota court data:

  • The individual identified by federal officials has never been in Minnesota DOC custody.
  • DOC and court records show no felony commitments associated with this
    Public Minnesota court records reflect only misdemeanor-level traffic offenses from more than a decade ago.
  • The individual is not currently under DOC supervision.

DOC records further indicate that an individual by this name was previously held in federal immigration custody in a local Minnesota jail in 2018, during President Trump’s first administration. Any decisions regarding release from federal custody at that time would have been made by federal authorities. DOC has no information explaining why this individual was released.

Importantly, the lies Melugin told were the maximal lies that adjudged liar Greg Bovino would himself tell. Fox News’ Chief Deportation propagandist immediately aired the claims of Greg Bovino, even though Melugin has to be aware of the many times Bovino has been proven a liar in court proceedings, including this two page passage from Judge Sara Ellis’ 233-page memorandum enjoining DHS from further abusive methods (which the Seventh Circuit overturned):

Turning to Bovino, the Court specifically finds his testimony not credible. Bovino appeared evasive over the three days of his deposition, either providing “cute” responses to Plaintiffs’ counsel’s questions or outright lying. When shown a video of agents hitting Rev. Black with pepper balls, Bovino denied seeing a projectile hit Rev. Black in the head. Doc. 191- 3 at 162:21–165:17; Doc. 22-44 (Ex. 44 at 0:10–12, available at https://spaces.hightail.com/space/ZzXNsei63k). In another video shown to Bovino, he obviously tackles Scott Blackburn, one of Plaintiffs’ declarants. Doc. 191-3 at 172:13–173:7; Doc. 22-45 (Ex. 45 at 0:19–30, available at https://spaces.hightail.com/space/ZzXNsei63k). But instead of admitting to using force against Blackburn, Bovino denied it and instead stated that force was used against him. Doc. 191-3 at 173:9–176:11, 179:11–181:5. Bovino also testified that, in Little Village on October 23, 2025, several individuals associated with the Latin Kings were found taking weapons out of the back of their car, and that they, as well as at least one individual on a rooftop and one person in the crowd of protesters, all wore maroon hoodies. Id. at 227:2– 228:21. He further testified that he believed the “maroon hoodies . . . would signify a potential assailant or street gang member that was making their way to the location that I was present” and that “there did begin to appear, in that crowd, maroon hoodies, both on top of buildings and in the crowd.” Doc. 237 at 18:22–19:10. But Bovino also admitted that he could not identify a street gang associated with the color maroon, id. at 19:11–13, although Hewson acknowledged that while Latin Kings members usually wear black, “they also can throw on maroon hoodies,” Doc. 255 at 264:17–20.10 Even were maroon hoodies to signify gang membership, the only evidence on footage from the relevant date of individuals dressed in maroon protesting in Little Village consists of a male wearing a maroonish jacket with an orange safety vest over it, Alderman Byron Sigcho-Lopez wearing a maroon sweater with a suit jacket over it, a female in a maroon shirt, a female in a maroon sweatshirt, and a man with a maroon hoodie under a green shirt and vest. Axon_Body_4_Video_2025-10-23_1053_D01A38302 at 10:03–10:33; Axon_Body_4_Video_2025-10-23_1106_D01A32103 at 16:12–17:17. Bovino’s and Hewson’s explanations about individuals in maroon hoodies being associated with the Latin Kings and threats strains credulity.

Most tellingly, Bovino admitted in his deposition that he lied multiple times about the events that occurred in Little Village that prompted him to throw tear gas at protesters. As discussed further below, Bovino and DHS have represented that a rock hit Bovino in the helmet before he threw tear gas. See Doc. 190-1 at 1; Homeland Security (@DHSgov), X (Oct. 28, 2025 9:56 a.m.), https://x.com/dhsgov/status/1983186057798545573?s=46&t=4rUXTBt_W24muWR74DQ5A. Bovino was asked about this during his deposition, which took place over three days. On the first day, Bovino admitted that he was not hit with a rock until after he had deployed tear gas. Doc. 191-3 at 222:24–223:18. Bovino then offered a new justification for his use of chemical munitions, testifying that he only threw tear gas after he “had received a projectile, a rock,” which “almost hit” him. Doc. 191-3 at 222:24–223:18. Despite being presented with video evidence that did not show a rock thrown at him before he launched the first tear gas canister, Bovino nonetheless maintained his testimony throughout the first and second days of his deposition, id. at 225–27; Doc. 237 at 11–17. But on November 4, 2025, the final session of his deposition, Bovino admitted that he was again “mistaken” and that no rock was thrown at him before he deployed the first tear gas canister. Doc. 238 at 9:12–21 (“That white rock was . . . thrown at me, but that was after . . . I deployed less lethal means in chemical munitions.”); id. at 10:20–23 (Q. [Y]ou deployed the canisters, plural, before that black rock came along and you say hit you in the head, correct? A. Yes. Before the rock hit me in the head, yes.”).

10 John Bodett testified at the preliminary injunction hearing about his experiences in Little Village. As a resident of that neighborhood, he stated that he observed Latin King colors to be black and gold. Doc. 255 at 84:10–17.

Everyone who has followed Stephen Miller’s invasions knows Bovino is a confirmed and committed liar. Yet Melugin still airs his claims, as if they might be credible, and rushed to do so after Pretti’s murder.

Melugin is an integral part of DHS’ propaganda apparatus.

And that’s why it matters that, yesterday, Melugin published a very long tweet describing how sad the goons are to be treated as goons. The statement is still full of bullshit (which I’ve annotated in bold comments).

NEW: Since yesterday’s deadly shooting in MN, I’ve talked to more than half a dozen federal sources [wow! six whole sources!] involved immigration enforcement, including several in senior positions, who all tell me they have grown increasingly uneasy & frustrated w/ some of the claims & narratives DHS pushed in the aftermath of the shooting.

Specifically, I’m told there is extreme frustration with DHS officials going on TV and putting out statements claiming that Alex Pretti was intending to conduct a “massacre” of federal agents or wanted to carry out “maximum damage”, [this claim was first aired by Melugin] even after numerous videos appeared to show those claims were inaccurate. While they say it was a terrible decision to show up with a gun and inject himself into a federal law enforcement operation, there is no indication Pretti was there to murder law enforcement, as videos appear to show he never drew his holstered firearm.

These sources say this messaging from DHS officials has been catastrophic from a PR and morale perspective, as it is eroding trust and credibility – comparing it to when Democrats falsely claimed the border was closed or that Haitians were being whipped at the border. [huh?]

Some of these sources have described DHS’ response to the shooting as “a case study on how not to do crisis PR”, one said they are so “fed up” that they wish they could retire, [I mean, you could just quit] another said “DHS is making the situation worse”, and another added that “DHS is wrong” and “we are losing this war, we are losing the base and the narrative.” [war? who are you in a war with?]

These sources all believe this is going to end up being what they call a “bad shoot”, a “shitty” situation that happened in seconds where agents likely heard “gun!” [one excuse], then the disarmed firearm may have had an accidental discharge [another excuse] that spooked the agents [boo!], and they shot. The agents do not have the luxury of multiple slow motion angles – and had to make split second decisions. [Alex Pretti doesn’t have the luxury of yet more thin excuses]

All of the sources support the mass deportation agenda, but have serious hesitations about the way it is being carried out [again, you could just quit] and the messaging that comes with it. Many of the sources have expressed frustration that ICE is routinely blamed for the actions of Border Patrol, a completely separate agency. [and yet ICE officer Jonathan Ross (who may have been working with Bovino) acted just as badly as Pretti’s murderers]

And as bullshit, we should treat it as yet more far right, probably white male, attempts to disavow personal responsibility for their own actions.

The entire country is seeing that the goons are trigger-happy goons, and in response, they’ve (well, six of them, anyway) run to Melugin to try to blame other goons for the bad behavior of all the goons.

The sentiment that the propaganda is not working anymore is shared more broadly, especially among Murdoch rags. WSJ issued an editorial calling on Trump to pause the invasion of MN. While it still tries to blame Pretti for helping a woman who was assaulted by CBP, it called bullshit on the lies that Stephen Miller and Kristi Noem were telling.

The Saturday shooting of Alex Pretti, as he lay on the ground surrounded by ICE agents, is the worst incident to date in what is becoming a moral and political debacle for the Trump Presidency.

Videos of an event aren’t always definitive, but this is how it looks to us. Pretti attempted, foolishly, to assist a woman who had been pepper-sprayed by agents. Multiple agents then tackled Pretti, and he had a phone in one hand as he lay on the ground. An agent discovered a concealed gun on Pretti, and disarmed him. An agent then shot Pretti, and multiple shots followed.

The Trump Administration spin on this simply isn’t believable. Stephen Miller, the political architect of the mass deportation policy, called Pretti a “domestic terrorist.” He was a nurse without a criminal record.

Kristi Noem, the Homeland Security secretary, said the fact that he carried a gun and (she said) two magazines, meant he “arrived at the scene to inflict maximum damage on individuals and to kill law enforcement.”

But he had a license to carry a gun, which was legally concealed, not carried in his hand as some claimed. He was carrying his phone. To hear the ardent gun-rights advocates of the Trump Administration claim he had malicious intentions because he carried a concealed weapon is bizarre.

[snip]

Whether he likes it or not, most of the burden now lies with Mr. Trump as the President who controls ICE. He would be wise to pause ICE enforcement in the Twin Cities to ease tensions and consider a less provocative strategy. Yes, many on the left would conclude that their civil disobedience has paid off. But Mr. Trump can still pursue enforcement with a smaller force and a strategy aimed at criminals, not at hotel maids and gardeners.

Mr. Trump and his advisers could also help themselves, and the country, by explaining what they are trying to do and sounding conciliatory. Ms. Noem and Mr. Miller aren’t credible spokesmen. Their social-media and cable-TV strategy is to own the libs, rather than to persuade Americans. [my emphasis]

And WSJ’s Trump-whisperer Josh Dawsey described Trump equivocating even as his advisors, starting with his chief gatekeeper, Stephen Miller, debate about what to do.

“I don’t like any shooting. I don’t like it,” Trump added. “But I don’t like it when somebody goes into a protest and he’s got a very powerful, fully loaded gun with two magazines loaded up with bullets also. That doesn’t play good either.”

Trump also signaled a willingness to eventually withdraw immigration enforcement officials from the Minneapolis area.

“At some point we will leave. We’ve done, they’ve done a phenomenal job,” he said. Trump didn’t offer a time frame for when agents might depart. Asked if agents would leave soon, he praised what the administration had done already in Minnesota and said, “We’ll leave a different group of people there for the financial fraud.”

[snip]

Trump’s advisers have been in discussions for weeks about the administration’s aggressive deportation policies, and Saturday’s shooting brought new urgency to those conversations.

Some of the president’s aides have come to see the increasingly volatile situation in Minneapolis as a political liability even as the White House has publicly doubled down on its operations in the city, according to administration officials. White House chief of staff Susie Wiles has taken repeated calls from Minnesota officials, the administration officials said.

Some in the administration worry that public polling and sentiment has turned against the administration’s immigration actions in cities, and some discussions have centered on how to continue deportations without clashing with protesters, officials said. Trump adviser Stephen Miller has continued to push for aggressive immigration enforcement, arguing the administration shouldn’t back down in Minneapolis.

Perhaps the savviest response among Republicans trying to talk sense to Trump came from OK Governor Kevin Stitt, who as Chair of the National Governor’s Association, has already spoken to federalism concerns during the Chicago invasion. Stitt told CNN that Trump was getting bad advice, a comment that — if Trump took it seriously — might lead him to question the garbage Stephen Miller tells him.

Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt, a Republican, expressed concerns about Trump’s goals.

“Americans are asking themselves: ‘What is the endgame? What is the solution?’ We believe in federalism and state rights. And nobody likes feds coming into their states. And so what’s the goal right now? Is it to deport every single non-US citizen? I don’t think that’s what Americans want,” Stitt told CNN’s Dana Bash on “State of the Union.”

Pressed by Bash on whether federal agents needed to pull out of Minnesota, Stitt said, “I think that the president has to answer that question. He is a dealmaker and he’s getting bad advice right now.”

(It is a failure of journalism that Stitt, who is of Cherokee descent, has not been asked about the multiple ICE arrests of Native Americans in Minnesota; neither has Markwayne Mullins, among Trump’s closest allies in the Senate, who is also Cherokee.)

The Pretti murder has, whatever else it has done, made blaming liars — starting with Kristi Noem — for the illegitimacy of the DHS invasions fashionable.

It’s the kind of collapsing legitimacy I envisioned when I laid out, starting 24 days ago, that three things we should try to accomplish this year were to:

  • Hold Stephen Miller accountable for his failures
  • Visualize how Stephen Miller took money for cancer research and veterans care to pay for a goon army snatching grandmothers
  • Discredit Key Spokespeople, including Stephen Miller, Todd Blanche’s office, DHS spox Tricia McLaughlin, and Greg Bovino.

Right wingers are looking at the polling and begging for an out and their immediate instinct is to scapegoat.

Thus far, Kristi Noem is the primary target of the scapegoating. Not even I have focused enough attention on Corey Lewandowski, not even in this post, even though he has overstayed the legal limits of the Special Government Employee appointment and has long exhibited the kind of quick trigger that DHS goons have.

Ultimately, though, Stephen Miller is responsible for both the invasions and Trump’s commitment to sustaining them, even as they destroy the US and Trump’s legacy.

From the start, Stephen Miller has believed that if he just created enough fascist spectacle, people would learn to love his thuggery. That was always failing because — it turns out — not as many people get erotic pleasure out of watching armed men roll around in the street on top of a brown person as Miller imagined; Miller created negative spectacle that drowned out his planned fascist spectacle.

Now that effort has gotten multiple people killed, Republicans want to distance themselves from it.

Their efforts to blame just Kristi Noem and/or Stephen Miller is, itself, just another propaganda campaign — after all, Bill Melugin is carrying it.

But if the right wing wants to tell that story, let’s make sure Miller is included in that story.

Update: Even NYP has called on Trump to deescalate.

Update: Kate Starbird describes that Melugin and other right wing spin artists actually got less engagement on Xitter than the left wing accounts that first posted about the murder.

Note the cluster of posts between 10am and 10:40am CST. (I’ve added a red box there.) These posts received, by far, the most engagement in our dataset. These are the posts that shape the broader discourse. And the vast majority of them were critical of ICE, sometimes implicitly, and other times explicitly calling out and blaming them for the “murder” or “execution” of “another person.” Below are a selection of the most highly reposted posts from that time:

During this same time period, a counter frame began to emerge — with the help of a Fox News journalist. Shortly after 10am CST, Bill Melugin reported via X that the victim, which he referred to as the “suspect,” had been armed. His post was sourced to DHS (the Department of Homeland Security) and contained an image of gun. This new information, which could be easily fit into a counter frame, set off a flurry of activity on the right.

We can see this in our data, as several right wing influencers posted content highlighting the “evidence” that DHS produced and using that to place blame on the victim. Here’s a selection of some of those posts, sized by number of reposts:

[snip]

These five posts, shared between 10am and 11am CST, reveal the prominent frames on the right, suggesting that the victim was responsible for his killing, that he was armed and resisting arrest, and that Democratic leadership contributed. Some of these posts seemingly extend beyond claims from official sources to make false allegations that the victim was an “illegal alien” and contested claims that he brandished and/or fired the weapon. Others simply spin the new evidence — of the victim’s gun — into alternative interpretations about the causes of the event.

But perhaps the most striking thing about this graph is that these posts from influencers on the right framing the event as self defense by ICE agents do not get anywhere near the same amount of engagement as the posts by influencers on the left framing the event as another “murder” by ICE.

By Lying about Alex Pretti’s Murder, Kristi Noem Makes Herself a Co-Conspirator In It

 

Jake Tapper took the video of Alex Pretti’s murder and overlaid Kristi Noem’s lies about it. You can’t show with the video what a declaration from a doctor who witnessed the shooting and tried to provide aide described, which proved Noem’s claim that medics provided assistance.

As I approached, I saw that the victim was lying on his side and was surrounded by several ICE agents. I was confused as to why the victim was on his side, because that is not standard practice when a victim has been shot. Checking for a pulse and administering CPR is standard practice. Instead of doing either of those things, the ICE agents appeared to be counting his bullet wounds.

I asked the ICE agents if the victim had a pulse, and they said they did not know.

After some cajoling, the murderers allowed the doctor to perform CPR until EMS personnel arrived.

There might have been questions regarding the Renee Good shooting.

Here there are none. CBP goons assaulted Alex Pretti, beat him, and then — when they discovered his lawfully registered weapon — murdered him.

Kristi Noem’s lies about what happened — to say nothing of Greg Bovino’s even worse lies (the Star Tribune’s fact check is worth reading) — make them both co-conspirators in this murder.

Kristi Noem’s goons are responsible for two of three murders committed in the state of Minnesota this year, effectively tripling the murder rate with their reckless and cowardly actions.

And Noem has made it clear she is a participant in the murders.

Pam Bondi’s Slop

I’ve been struggling all morning (in truth, for the last several days) to describe the kaleidoscope of ways Trump is destroying rule of law.

It perhaps is best conveyed by a contrast between all the shit going on in Minnesota and what happened in Chicago yesterday.

Pam Bondi personally went to Minnesota to secure arrests of people who protested the Southern Baptist Church whose minister, David Easterwood, also runs the local ICE department. When the FBI went to arrest one of them, Nekima Levy Armstrong, they arrested the wrong Black woman at first. Then the White House posted a meme of her, slopped up to make it look like she was crying, and falsely accusing her of rioting.

The AI slop will make it far easier for Levy to argue this is vindictive.

DOJ had tried to charge Don Lemon, but a Magistrate Judge refused to charge someone who was legitimately covering a protest. And now Lemon, who is represented by the omnipresent Abbe Lowell, is taunting Bondi.

The Magistrate also refused to approve FACE charges against those already arrested.

The arrest of the wrong Black woman was not the only case of mistaken identity in Trump’s invasion of Minnesota this week. It turns out that the out-of-state ICE goon who shot Venezuelan Julio Cesar Sosa-Celis thought he was chasing one guy, Joffre Barrera, who is 5’2″ and 128 pounds, but was instead chasing Alfredo Alejandro Aljorna, who is 5’7″ and 172 pounds.

Both have short brown hair.

Sosa-Celis and Aljorna might have a decent argument that they had no way of being sure the ICE goon they’re accused of assaulting was actually ICE. According to the arrest affidavit, the ICE goon who shot Sosa-Celis was not wearing anything that identified him as Police — his badge and gun were on a tactical belt. His buddy, who was wearing a tactical vest identifying him as police, was not yet present when the assault and shooting happened. And they were driving an unmarked vehicle. Except both defendants talked to the cops without an attorney and confessed to knowing the goons were ICE.

Meanwhile, the backlash surrounding the snatching and use as bait of five year old Liam Conejo Ramos has gotten so bad that Stephen Miller is openly defensive.

The problem for Miller is that, at least according to the attorney for Ramos’ family, they are in the US legally, seeking asylum.

Marc Prokosch, the family’s attorney, said they came to the U.S. in 2024 from Ecuador, had an active asylum case and the preschooler should never have been detained. He said the family was properly following immigration rules and [his father, Adrian] Conejo Arias had no criminal history.

The Ramoses are not the only ones. The local Fox affiliate describes that there have been more habeas petitions filed this year than the entirety of last year.

Immigration attorneys say they are filing habeas corpus petitions to secure the release of detainees at a “dizzying pace.”

The petitions are constitutionally protected challenges to the government’s arrest of an individual. However, the Trump Administration previously suggested suspending those rights.

In the context of immigration enforcement operations, the petitions ask federal judges to either release individuals from custody or grant them a bond hearing in immigration court.

By the numbers: According to case data reviewed by the FOX 9 Investigators, 312 immigrant detainees had sought habeas relief through Jan. 21.

The number of petitions filed in the district court of Minnesota in the first three weeks of the year has already surpassed the 260 filed in the entirety of 2025.

Meanwhile, Minnesota Public Radio tracked down the people on one of DHS’ “worst of the worst” lists — the people DHS falsely claimed to have snatched during this invasion. Most had been released into ICE custody before the recent invasion.

[M]ost of the people on the list had been immediately transferred to ICE custody at the end of time served in Minnesota prisons.

All of those transfers happened before ICE began its surge of operations in Minnesota on Dec. 1, 2025, with some even happening years before.

[snip]

[F]ive of those individuals were transferred from prison custody to ICE custody between August and late November. Three others were handed over to ICE custody by DOC during previous presidential administrations.

And one person was offered to be released to ICE custody more than a decade ago and ICE declined, according to the DOC.

[snip]

[O]ne was put on probation for 30 years and was never in DOC custody, and two were only ever in the custody of county jails and never in DOC custody.

One person on the list was convicted of crimes in Ohio, where it is unclear if they had an ICE detainer, which is a request to hold a prisoner for another agency. The Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction did not respond for a request for information on the matter.

Click through for the list, including the guy released to ICE in 2012 — and share this widely.

Relatedly, Bulwark and a local ABC affiliate reports that the guy DHS claimed they were looking for when they snatched a senior Hmong-American in his underwear was already in prison.

Sometimes, the “worst of the worst” — the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s catchphrase for undocumented immigrants with violent criminal records — are exactly where one would expect: prison.

That was the case for Lue Moua, a 52-year-old Laotian man who DHS officials say they were looking for when they instead arrested an elderly U.S. citizen last weekend.

The images of ChongLy Thao’s arrest by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement in St. Paul sparked outrage in Minnesota and across the internet.

Several videos show Thao, a U.S. citizen, led out of his home in freezing weather, wearing nothing but his boxers, sandals and a blanket draped around him. Thao’s family alleges the agents did not present a warrant, nor did they ask Thao for identification. He was released shortly afterward.

In a statement explaining Thao’s detention, ICE officials say they were looking for two undocumented Laotian men with criminal records, Moua and Kongmeng Vang, who they say lived with Thao. They also said Thao matched the description of those men.

Family members said they had no knowledge of either and that Thao lived with his son, daughter-in-law and his young grandson.

So where are these men?

Moua, who has felony convictions dating back to 1992 of fifth-degree criminal sexual conduct, kidnapping, and violating a parental custody order, has been incarcerated at Minnesota Corrections Facility-Faribault since Sept. 4, 2024. His expected release date is Jan. 7, 2027.

It’s all bullshit, all the way down.

Contrast that effort to criminalize dissent in Minnesota and claim five year old boys are scary criminals with the most spectacular faceplant yet in Trump’s attempt to gin up criminal cases to justify Stephen Miller’s dragnet, the acquittal of Juan Espinoza Martinez, who was accused of attempting to pay for a hit on Greg Bovino. Jon Seidel describes how the case collapsed after DOJ conceded they could not prove that Martinez had ties to the Latin Kings.

The original criminal complaint cited a “source of information,” now known to be 44-year-old Adrian Jimenez, who called Espinoza Martinez a “ranking member of the Latin Kings.” A Homeland Security press release also called Espinoza Martinez a “Latin Kings gang member.”

But earlier this month, First Assistant U.S. Attorney Jason Yonan and Assistant U.S. Attorney Minje Shin acknowledged they would not try to prove Espinoza Martinez’s gang membership at trial.

That prompted Lefkow to bar gang evidence from the case. She wrote in an order that, “without evidence showing that [Espinoza Martinez] is a member of the Latin Kings or that the Latin Kings instructed [Espinoza Martinez] to send the alleged murder-for-hire information, the prejudicial nature of such testimony outweighs any probative value.”

In an emergency hearing hours after that ruling last week, Yonan told [Judge Joan] Lefkow that “nearly every piece of evidence in this case touches, in some fashion, on the Latin Kings.”

But the trial still kicked off. The feds called only three witnesses Wednesday, who testified over the course of nearly three hours, combined. Then, in closing arguments Thursday, Yonan told jurors that Espinoza Martinez was “angry” about immigration enforcement last fall in Little Village, where he lived.

“He was fixated, and obsessed, with Gregory Bovino,” Yonan told the jury.

Prosecutors told jurors about a message Espinoza Martinez sent over Snapchat to Jimenez in early October. It followed a picture of Bovino and read, “2k on info cuando lo agarren,” “10k if u take him down,” and “LK … on him.”

Jimenez testified that he understood that to mean “$2,000 when they grab him … $10,000 if you kill him … Latin Kings are on him.”

Martinez’ brother explained one piece of evidence DOJ attempted to use against him: a gun that the brother (who has a concealed carry permit) was seeking for himself. And his attorneys emphasized that there was no evidence of an actual hit.

[Dena] Singer told the jury, “the government has failed to prove their case. You know it.”

No money exchanged hands, she said. No weapons were purchased. Social media, she said, “is riddled with things that aren’t true. … with people sending and sharing things.” There was no evidence that Espinoza Martinez intended for the murder to happen, or that he took a “substantial step,” she said.

Ultimately, live coverage of the trial made it sound like Martinez was passing on the chatter from his neighborhood, not plotting a hit himself (and it probably helped frame the case that the informant was seeking immigration protection himself).

As Seidel notes, this marks the 15th case, of 31, that have collapsed in Chicago since the invasion (I tracked the collapse of all the cases from just one day, September 27, here).

Espinoza Martinez is one of 31 known defendants charged in Chicago’s federal court with non-immigration crimes tied to the Trump administration’s aggressive deportation campaign last fall. With Thursday’s acquittal of Espinoza Martinez, 15 of them have now been cleared.

DOJ has pointed to this case, over and over, to claim there’s a real threat against Stephen Miller’s goons, including in their failed bid to get SCOTUS to bless Miller’s deployment of the National Guard to invade Chicago.

An alleged leader of the Latin Kings gang in Chicago is being prosecuted for placing a bounty of $10,000 on the murder of a Border Patrol Chief. Hott Decl. ¶¶ 24; Parra Decl. ¶ 17. These activities substantially interfere with DHS’s ability to enforce federal immigration laws in the Chicago area. See, e.g., Hott Decl. ¶¶ 43-47, 63. And it was clearly erroneous for the district court to discredit or minimize the unrebutted sworn testimony that those acts of violence and threats of violence in fact occurred.

There may well be; the actual Latin Kings may well be seeking to target Bovino (one of the people arrested for ransacking an FBI vehicle in Minnesota is more credibly claimed to be a Latin King). But if they are, then FBI wouldn’t learn of it because they are doing showboat arrests, not investigations.

Which is one of the many points in this compilation of quotes about how Kash Patel is destroying the FBI. Many of these anecdotes have been told anonymously in past reporting, but they are more powerful laid out like this; set aside some time to read this in full. FBI is not chasing complex crime anymore; they’re creating photo ops that please Donald Trump.

Patel directed the F.B.I., which has no immigration-enforcement authority, to support Immigration and Customs Enforcement in conducting raids and making arrests. Field offices began assigning F.B.I. agents and analysts to work immigration shifts, pulling them away from other priorities like counterterrorism, public corruption and white-collar crime.

John Sullivan, former section chief in the intelligence division: We’d been told that when Trump watched footage or saw a picture of a raid, he got mad that he didn’t see F.B.I. raid jackets.

ICE was saying they wanted their teams to commingle with our teams. Tactically, you don’t commingle units that haven’t trained together. My bosses said, If we work on immigration, we use our teams and our case info. They put together a list of people already in F.B.I. files we had concerns about, so we’re not just targeting people over their citizenship status.

They also had to juggle Kristi Noem, the secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, who wanted to ride in our tactical vehicle to do her TV stuff. That makes all the operators uneasy, and it makes them less safe.

And that makes it harder for FBI to do the complex investigations only they can do.

Midwest case agent: I was a grunt agent. I enjoyed trying to take apart large criminal organizations piece by piece.

They relabeled task forces from drugs to immigration and pushed us toward focusing on deportation versus convictions for actual drug offenses.

Unfortunately, what used to be our focus, long-term investigations, are now short-term hits. You hit the guy carrying the bag, not the guy who made the call, because that’s how you drive up the arrest and prosecution numbers. But the guy carrying the bag, you can’t flip anymore, because he’s getting deported.

Because F.B.I. agents are posting up with Homeland Security, citizens think we’re part of ICE, which disrupts other investigations. It used to be that you could sit in front of a house, watching another house, and a lot of the time, people were OK with that. They might help you. Now they’re scared.

All this was unrolling against the background of Jack Smith’s testimony. While there were moments of interest — Smith forcefully explained why Stan Woodward’s attack on Jay Bratt was bullshit, for example — mostly I feel the same way Phil Bump does. Everyone was just performing for the cameras.

There wasn’t much use to the hearing. There’s no actual question to adjudicate. No serious and unbiased observer questions Smith’s objectivity or credibility and no serious observer questions that Trump tried to overturn the 2020 election, triggering the riot that overwhelmed the building on Jan. 6, 2021. In effect, then, the existence of the hearing necessarily served to reinforce the falsehood that there was a debate in the first place.

Smith summarized the importance of recognizing reality in his opening remarks.

“The rule of law is not self-executing,” he said. That is, the bounds of the law are real only to the extent that they are respected. Smith, better than most, understands what it looks like when that respect evaporates.

The product of the hearing wasn’t a studious consideration of the validity of his work since, as stipulated above, there was nothing serious to mull over. Instead, the primary output of the hearing was probably a tidy stream of social-media-friendly video snippets. Members of the House (nearly all of whom will soon face primaries or reelection) saw an opportunity to make news and most of them tried.

What this means, in effect, is that the hearing not only didn’t resolve any tension between reality and surreality, it simply dug each side in a little deeper.

Perhaps the most effective moment in the hearing was Jared Moskowitz’ soliloquy, which combined a reminder of all the times the very same Republicans who performed Donald Trump’s assault on Smith’s investigation expressed terror during January 6 itself.

The AI slop the White House released yesterday really embodies what Pam Bondi’s DOJ has become.

Bullshit all the way down.

Time to Ask if Stephen Miller Has Authorized Assault and Murder of Peaceful ICE Observers

I started my day intending to write about the details surrounding SEIU California President David Heurta’s assault in June revealed in a motion to dismiss and a motion to compel discovery filed yesterday. And I’ve been meaning to do a post on what much coverage of the dismissal of the case against Carlitos Ricardo Parias, a TikToker ICE shot on October 21, has not said: Basically DOJ avoided giving Parias due process by stashing him in a GEO detention facility and preventing his criminal defense attorneys any access, effectively escaping accountability for the shooting that way.

But later in the day, a DHS officer shot and killed an ICE observer, Renee Good, in Minneapolis. Both the Star Tribune and MPR have a running threads of developments.

Here’s a tracker of all the people ICE have shot, including a guy in San Diego shot after he shot his own gun to celebrate the New Year only to have an off-duty ICE officer kill him.

And so instead I’m going to float a suspicion I’ve been nursing.

In Greg Bovino’s deposition for the Chicago Book Club lawsuit, plaintiffs counsel Locke Bowman asked whether Kristi Noem gave him direction on the use of force. She does not.

Q Do you report to Secretary Noem to receive direction as to the use of force in the course of Operation Midway Blitz?

A Are you asking if — if she gives me driection —

Q Yes, sir.

A –to use of force?

Q Yes. If she gives you direction as to how and when to employ force?

A No.

But when Bowman asked Bovino if he had spoken to Stephen Miller about use of force, the DOJ lawyer, Sarmad Khojasteh, instructed him not to answer.

Q All right. How about Mr. Miller, have you spoken with Mr. Miller on the subject of employment of force and the issues of crowd control that you were facing in Operation Midway Blitz?

Mr. Khojasteh: Object to form. I’m going to instruct the witness not to answer to the extent that it — doing so would implicate executive privilege.

Q Okay. So there has been an invocation of privilege, and you are not answering the question based on that invocation, correct, sir?

A That’s correct.

Q I will ask the same question generally. Other than the two individuals I have mentioned, have you spoken with any of your superiors in the executive branch with respect to the issue of crowd control and the application of force in the course of Operation Midway Blitz?

Mr. Khojasteh: Object to form. Lacks foundation. Vague as to superiors in the executive branch.

Q I’ll stand on the question. Could you answer, please?

A Sir, could you be more specific, please?

Q In what respect?

A Who in the executive branch?

Q I’m asking anyone in the executive branch.

Mr. Khojasteh: Then I’m — if you’re going to be that vague about it, Counsel, I’m going to instruct the witness not to answer to the — that to the extent that doing so would reveal executive communications.

Q All right. Without revealing executive communications, and my question didn’t ask for the revelation of communications, can you answer, please?

A Based on the advice of my lawyer, no.

Q I’m not sure — was there an instruction not to answer as to the last question that I propounded?

Mr. Khojasteh: I’m not even sure I understood the last question you propounded.

Q Well, so there was no instruction?

Mr. Khojasteh: Well, I think — I thought it was the same question that I had —

Q Okay.

Mr. Khojasteh: — given the instructions.

Bovino: That’s what I thought. That’s the way I thought.

Q. Okay. All right. So is it true, with respect to the application of force and crowd control, that you take your orders from the executive branch, whether that’s President Trump or Secretary Noem?

Mr. Khojasteh: Object to form. Lacks foundation. Asked and answered.

Bovino: Can you repeat that, please?

Q Yes. Is it true, with respect to the application of force and the matter of crowd control during the course of Operation Midway Blitz, that you take your orders from the executive branch, whether that’s President Trump or Secretary Noem?

Mr. Khojasteh: I’m going to instruct the witness not to answer to the extent that doing so would reveal communications between he and the President.

Q I didn’t ask to reveal communications. I asked if what I just read is a true statement.

Mr. Khojasteh: Yeah, but embedded in your question is the substance of the communication you’re asking, right?

Q This calls for a yes or no. Can you answer it, yes or no?

Mr. Khojasteh: I’m going to instruct you not to answer as with — as it relates to communications with President Trump or anyone in the White House.

Bowman also noted that in a TV appearance, Bovino said he took his instructions from the Executive Branch, whether Trump or Kristi Noem.

The implication is fairly clear: That Stephen Miller is the one instructing him on use of force.

Greg Bovino was present for today’s shooting.

In the wake of the shooting, Tricia McLaughlin, Kristi Noem, Stephen Miller, and Donald Trump all have told vicious lies about the shooting; their lies aren’t even consistent with each other, much less the video.

The shooting comes in the wake of the Supreme Court ruling that Trump can’t deploy the National Guard to cities unless he has first resorted to active duty troops.

It’s time to ask whether Stephen Miller ordered Greg Bovino to shoot those who document DHS’ invasions.

Fridays with Nicole Sandler

Note, as we discuss at the very end of this, we’re wondering when/if you think we should record next week. We could do it on Wednesday, Friday, or not at all. Let us know!

 

Also, here’s that graphic Nicole mentioned, which shows that we’re firing cancer researchers and VA nurses and replacing them with ICE goons.

 

Listen on Spotify (transcripts available)

Listen on Apple (transcripts available)

“Shitshow:” Greg Bovino’s Zero Success Rate

Back on October 8, I noted that of the eleven people DHS claimed had been arrested at a September 27 protest at the Broadview ICE facility in Chicago, a protest at which Greg Bovino had promised a “shitshow,” the cases of all but one had been dismissed.

Bovino, I noted, was batting just 9% on his claims that protestors had engaged in violence.

Well, yesterday, the case of Dana Briggs, a 70-year old Air Force veteran charged with assault when he fell as officers were pushing him back, was dismissed too. He had planned to call Bovino as a witness at his December trial. Bovino’s success rate at substantiating his claim there were any rioters from that day is now zero.

Briggs is not actually the most stunning dismissal from yesterday. The case against Marimar Martinez (and her co-defendant Anthony Ruiz) was also dismissed, just before a follow-up hearing on the things the CBP agent, Charles Exum, did and said before and after he shot her.

At a press hearing afterward, Martinez’ attorney Christopher Parente suggested they would still be seeking vindication for her, so hopefully we’ll still get to learn what DOJ dropped the case in hopes of suppressing.

The Magistrate Judge who dismissed Briggs case (who had also signed the arrest warrants for the five actual arrests on September 27), Gabriel Fuentes, wrote a long opinion about the collapse of the September 27 cases.

Examining more closely the five September 27 Broadview criminal arrest cases, all of which came before the undersigned magistrate judge, the Court notes the following facts:

1) The initial complaints charged four (Collins, Robledo, Ivery, and Briggs) of the foregoing five persons with felony violations of Section 111(a). Only the complaint against Mazur was filed as a misdemeanor.

2) With today’s dismissal of the Briggs criminal information, none of these cases remains pending today – all have been dismissed.

3) As the docket entries reflect in all five of the cases, the undersigned magistrate judge obtained a sworn statement from the affiants in each affidavit, at the time of complaint issuance, that not only were the affidavit allegations true, but that video evidence of the encounters existed, that the affiants had reviewed the video evidence, and that the video evidence corroborated the version of events set forth in the affidavits. Mazur (D.E. 11); Collins/Robledo (D.E. 26); Ivery (D.E. 13); and Briggs (D.E. 14).

[snip]

4) Each of the five persons arrested on September 27 from Broadview on Section 111 charges endured official detention (or other government restrictions on their liberty) after their arrests.

[snip]

Importantly, nothing in this order should be construed as scolding the government for dismissing in these cases. Dismissing appears to be the responsible thing for the government to have done, in light of the government’s judgment and discretion. But the Court cannot help but note just how unusual and possibly unprecedented it is for the U.S. Attorney’s Office in this district to charge so hastily that it either could not obtain the indictment in the grand jury or was forced to dismiss upon a conclusion that the case is not provable, in repeated cases of a similar nature. Federal arrest brings federal detention, even for a short time. It brings the need to obtain counsel, to appear at court hearings, to answer the charges (as Briggs did in this case, pleading not guilty), and to prepare for trial (as Briggs also has had to do in this case). Being charged with a federal felony, even if it is later reduced to a misdemeanor, is no walk in the park.

He also noted, repeatedly, that Briggs’ case was dismissed when he noticed his intent to call Bovino to testify.

Also yesterday, Judge Sara Ellis released her 233-page opinion in the Civil Rights case against the ICE/CBP invasion (my weekend reading, I guess), which catalogs the depredations done during that invasion, including her judgement that Bovino is a liar.

Turning to Bovino, the Court specifically finds his testimony not credible. Bovino appeared evasive over the three days of his deposition, either providing “cute” responses to Plaintiffs’ counsel’s questions or outright lying. When shown a video of agents hitting Rev. Black with pepper balls, Bovino denied seeing a projectile hit Rev. Black in the head. Doc. 191- 3 at 162:21–165:17; Doc. 22-44 (Ex. 44 at 0:10–12, available at https://spaces.hightail.com/space/ZzXNsei63k). In another video shown to Bovino, he obviously tackles Scott Blackburn, one of Plaintiffs’ declarants. Doc. 191-3 at 172:13–173:7; Doc. 22-45 (Ex. 45 at 0:19–30, available at https://spaces.hightail.com/space/ZzXNsei63k). But instead of admitting to using force against Blackburn, Bovino denied it and instead stated that force was used against him. Doc. 191-3 at 173:9–176:11, 179:11–181:5. Bovino also testified that, in Little Village on October 23, 2025, several individuals associated with the Latin Kings were found taking weapons out of the back of their car, and that they, as well as at least one individual on a rooftop and one person in the crowd of protesters, all wore maroon hoodies. Id. at 227:2– 228:21. He further testified that he believed the “maroon hoodies . . . would signify a potential assailant or street gang member that was making their way to the location that I was present” and that “there did begin to appear, in that crowd, maroon hoodies, both on top of buildings and in the crowd.” Doc. 237 at 18:22–19:10. But Bovino also admitted that he could not identify a street gang associated with the color maroon, id. at 19:11–13, although Hewson acknowledged that while Latin Kings members usually wear black, “they also can throw on maroon hoodies,” Doc. 255 at 264:17–20.10 Even were maroon hoodies to signify gang membership, the only evidence on footage from the relevant date of individuals dressed in maroon protesting in Little Village consists of a male wearing a maroonish jacket with an orange safety vest over it, Alderman Byron Sigcho-Lopez wearing a maroon sweater with a suit jacket over it, a female in a maroon shirt, a female in a maroon sweatshirt, and a man with a maroon hoodie under a green shirt and vest. Axon_Body_4_Video_2025-10-23_1053_D01A38302 at 10:03–10:33; Axon_Body_4_Video_2025-10-23_1106_D01A32103 at 16:12–17:17. Bovino’s and Hewson’s explanations about individuals in maroon hoodies being associated with the Latin Kings and threats strains credulity.

Most tellingly, Bovino admitted in his deposition that he lied multiple times about the events that occurred in Little Village that prompted him to throw tear gas at protesters. As discussed further below, Bovino and DHS have represented that a rock hit Bovino in the helmet before he threw tear gas. See Doc. 190-1 at 1; Homeland Security (@DHSgov), X (Oct. 28, 2025 9:56 a.m.), https://x.com/dhsgov/status/1983186057798545573?s=46&t=4rUXTBt_W24muWR74DQ5A. Bovino was asked about this during his deposition, which took place over three days. On the first day, Bovino admitted that he was not hit with a rock until after he had deployed tear gas. Doc. 191-3 at 222:24–223:18. Bovino then offered a new justification for his use of chemical munitions, testifying that he only threw tear gas after he “had received a projectile, a rock,” which “almost hit” him. Doc. 191-3 at 222:24–223:18. Despite being presented with video evidence that did not show a rock thrown at him before he launched the first tear gas canister, Bovino nonetheless maintained his testimony throughout the first and second days of his deposition, id. at 225–27; Doc. 237 at 11–17. But on November 4, 2025, the final session of his deposition, Bovino admitted that he was again “mistaken” and that no rock was thrown at him before he deployed the first tear gas canister. Doc. 238 at 9:12–21 (“That white rock was . . . thrown at me, but that was after . . . I deployed less lethal means in chemical munitions.”); id. at 10:20–23 (Q. [Y]ou deployed the canisters, plural, before that black rock came along and you say hit you in the head, correct? A. Yes. Before the rock hit me in the head, yes.”).

This is what the complete collapse of credibility looks like.

It should have happened after Bovino got caught prevaricating on the stand in Brayan Ramos-Brito’s Los Angeles trial in September, another protestor charged with assault but ultimately exonerated.

But unless and until an Appeals Court disrupts Ellis’ finding (the Seventh Circuit has stayed her order with respect to remedy, not fact-finding), the word of Greg Bovino will be utterly useless in any court in the United States.

Greg Bovino and his violent goons have moved on, at least to Charlotte (where — as Chris Geidner laid out — Bovino doesn’t understand he’s the guy trying to kill Wilbur, not the clever spider who thwarts that effort), possibly already onto New Orleans.

But his reputation as a liar will now follow him wherever he goes.

How City of Chicago Beat Back Stephen Miller’s Shoddy Propaganda … So Far

No one has confessed they were wrong that JB Pritzker’s late August messaging was enough to stave off an invasion.

Shortly after Pritzker had that press conference on August 27, Trump announced he was going to invade New Orleans instead of Chicago, implying that he wanted to be invited to invade.

President Donald Trump said on Wednesday that he may deploy federal troops to New Orleans next, not Chicago, and is waiting for governors to ask for help — a shift in his rhetoric about moving into major U.S. cities uninvited.

“We are making a determination now: Do we go to Chicago? Or do we go to a place like New Orleans where we have a great governor, Jeff Landry, who wants us to come in and straighten out a very nice section of this country that has become quite – quite tough, quite bad?” Trump said during an Oval Office meeting alongside Poland’s new president.

“You have New Orleans, which has a crime problem. We’ll straighten that out in two weeks, easier than D.C.,” Trump said.

That was a walk-back of his declaration just 24 hours earlier that “we’re going in” to Chicago, a city he has long maligned for violent crime but has a Democratic governor who opposes Trump’s deployment of federal troops in his state.

That led to a wave of wishcasting that Pritzker’s strong words (particularly as compared to what Gavin Newsom had done) were enough to stave off invasion.

They weren’t.

The details in Illinois’ lawsuit that has, thus far, at least, halted the invasion by the National Guard, reveal that even as lefties were celebrating the effect of Pritzker’s firey rhetoric, ICE was laying the groundwork to create the excuse to send in troops.

On September 2, 2025—as President Trump was repeatedly threatening a troop deployment in Chicago—ICE’s Chicago Field Director Russell Hott and Assistant Field Director Jimmy Bahena met with Broadview’s Chief of Police, Thomas Mills.76 In that meeting, Director Hott informed Chief Mills and his staff that, beginning the next day, a large number of federal agents, including approximately 250 to 300 CBP agents, would begin arriving in Illinois to assist with a ramped-up immigration enforcement campaign in the Chicagoland area.77 Director Hott stated their goal was to make large numbers of immigration-related arrests and stated that the ICE facility in Broadview would be the primary processing location for the operation.78 Director Hott stated that the facility would operate continuously, seven days per week for approximately 45 continuous days.79

Director Hott also informed Chief Mills that ICE officials expected numerous protests, including potential property damage and assaults against law enforcement personnel, similar to what had occurred in Los Angeles earlier in the year. 80 ICE officials also expected there to be impacts on traffic and businesses in the immediate vicinity of ICE’s detention center, located at 1930 Beach Street in Broadview. 81 [my emphasis]

Broadview Police Chief Thomas Mills described in a declaration how the arrival of agents in tactical gear changed the tone of the crowd.

21. At around 10:00 a.m. that morning, 20-30 federal agents parked their vehicles in the parking lot on the opposite side of Beach Street and began to walk across the street toward the ICE facility. The agents were dressed in camouflage tactical gear and had masks covering their faces. September 12 was the first day that I recall seeing federal agents on scene dressed in that manner. It was a very noticeable shift in my mind.

22. As agents approached the ICE facility that day, September 12, the tone of the crowd of protestors changed. The crowd grew louder and began to press closer to the building. Broadview Police officers positioned ourselves on the public way, between the 1930 Beach Street building and the crowd, attempting to keep the crowd on the public way and off of ICE’s property. When the federal agents went into the building, the crowd calmed down, and Broadview Police officers relocated to the outer perimeter of the crowd.

For 44 days and counting, Stephen Miller’s goons have been trying to create a pretext to federalize law enforcement in Chicago.

Along the way, they’ve engaged in a whole bunch of propaganda: making false claims of assault to explain away ICE assaults, setting up dramatized attacks on an entire apartment building, deliberately creating “shitshows” that result in arrests that almost all get dismissed.

And at least thus far, it has not worked.

When Judge Amy Perry ruled against the National Guard deployment last week, she found that all three government affiants claiming there was unrest in Chicago that justified an invasion lacked credibility.

The Court therefore must make a credibility assessment as to which version of the facts should be believed. While the Court does not doubt that there have been acts of vandalism, civil disobedience, and even assaults on federal agents, the Court cannot conclude that Defendants’ declarations are reliable. Two of Defendants’ declarations refer to arrests made on September 27, 2025 of individuals who were carrying weapons and assaulting federal agents. See Doc. 62-2 at 19; Doc. 62-4 at 5. But neither declaration discloses that federal grand juries have refused to return an indictment against at least three of those individuals, which equates to a finding of a lack of probable cause that any crime occurred. See United States v. Ray Collins and Jocelyne Robledo, 25-cr-608, Doc. 26 (N.D. Ill. Oct. 7, 2025); United States v. Paul Ivery, 25-cr-609 (N.D. Ill.). In addition to demonstrating a potential lack of candor by these affiants, it also calls into question their ability to accurately assess the facts. Similar declarations were provided by these same individuals in Chicago Headline Club et. al. v. Noem, 25-cv-12173, Doc. 35-1, Doc. 35-9 (N.D. Ill.), a case which challenged the Constitutionality of ICE’s response to protestors at the Broadview ICE Processing Center. In issuing its TRO against DHS Secretary Kristi Noem, the court in that case found that the plaintiffs would likely be able to show that ICE’s actions have violated protestors’ First Amendment right to be free from retaliation while engaged in newsgathering, religious exercise, and protest, and Fourth Amendment rights to be free from excessive force. Id. at Doc. 43. Although this Court was not asked to make any such finding, it does note a troubling trend of Defendants’ declarants equating protests with riots and a lack of appreciation for the wide spectrum that exists between citizens who are observing, questioning, and criticizing their government, and those who are obstructing, assaulting, or doing violence.5 This indicates to the Court both bias and lack of objectivity. The lens through which we view the world changes our perception of the events around us. Law enforcement officers who go into an event expecting “a shitshow” are much more likely to experience one than those who go into the event prepared to de-escalate it. Ultimately, this Court must conclude that Defendants’ declarants’ perceptions are not reliable.6

Finally, the Court notes its concern about a third declaration submitted by Defendants, in which the declarant asserted that the FPS “requested federalized National Guard personnel to support protection of the Federal District Court on Friday, October 10, 2025.” Doc. 62-3. This purported fact was incendiary and seized upon by both parties at oral argument. It was also inaccurate, as the Court noted on the record. To their credit, Defendants have since submitted a corrected declaration, and the affiant has declared that they did not make the error willfully. Doc. 65-1. All of the parties have been moving quickly to compile factual records and legal arguments, and mistakes in such a context are inevitable. That said, Defendants only presented declarations from three affiants with first-hand knowledge of events in Illinois. And, as described above, all three contain unreliable information. [Links added]

One of the most persuasive things Illinois was able to do was to show that at the same time that ERO Field Director Russ Hott was submitting a sworn declaration claiming all manner of horribles, he was sending email saying something totally different to the local cops saying something totally different.

It’s not clear, in this day and age, whether definitively proving that Stephen Miller and Kristi Noem and Greg Bovino and Tricia McLaughlin are just making shit up will be enough. Certainly, the right wingers on SCOTUS have proven just as susceptible to the Fox News propaganda bubble as Trump himself.

But thus far, at least, truth has won out over fabrications.

Update: The 7th Circuit just declined to disrupt Judge Perry’s retraining order. The panel — which included Trump appointee Amy St. Eve — cited Perry’s credibility ruling this way:

After holding a hearing and assessing the preliminary record, the court granted in part plaintiffs’ request for a temporary restraining order and enjoined the federalization and deployment of the National Guard for 14 days. The court withheld judgment on a preliminary injunction and did not extend its order to non–National Guard military forces or the President himself. The district court recognized the substantial deference due a President’s assessment of whether § 12406(2) or (3)’s factual predicates are satisfied, but it concluded nonetheless that, under its factual findings, the statutory requirements were not met. Where the declarations of the administration conflicted with the declarations of state and local law enforcement concerning conditions on the ground, the court made a credibility determination in plaintiffs’ favor. In particular, the court found that all three of the federal government’s declarations from those with firsthand knowledge were unreliable to the extent they omitted material information or were undermined by independent, objective evidence.

[snip]

Even giving great deference to the administration’s determinations, the district court’s contrary factual findings— which, at this expedited phase of the case, are necessarily preliminary and tentative—are not clearly erroneous. The submitted evidence consists almost entirely of two sets of competing declarations describing the events in Broadview. The district court provided substantial and specific reasons for crediting the plaintiffs’ declarations over the administration’s, and the record includes ample support for that decision. Given the record support, the findings are not clearly erroneous. See United States v. Nichols, 847 F.3d 851, 857 (7th Cir. 2017) (explaining that “where the district court’s factual findings are supported by the record, we will not disturb them” under clear-error review).

The opinion was more important for the way it defined rebellion (in part, because the same ruling will be the starting point for discussions of insurrection).

Although we substantially agree with the definition of rebellion set forth by the district court in Newsom, we emphasize that the critical analysis of a “rebellion” centers on the nature of the resistance to governmental authority. Political opposition is not rebellion. A protest does not become a rebellion merely because the protestors advocate for myriad legal or policy changes, are well organized, call for significant changes to the structure of the U.S. government, use civil disobedience as a form of protest, or exercise their Second Amendment right to carry firearms as the law currently allows. Nor does a protest become a rebellion merely because of sporadic and isolated incidents of unlawful activity or even violence committed by rogue participants in the protest. Such conduct exceeds the scope of the First Amendment, of course, and law enforcement has apprehended the perpetrators accordingly. But because rebellions at least use deliberate, organized violence to resist governmental authority, the problematic incidents in this record clearly fall within the considerable daylight between protected speech and rebellion.

Applying our tentative understanding of “rebellion” to the district court’s factual findings, and even after affording great deference to the President’s evaluation of the circumstances, we see insufficient evidence of a rebellion or danger of rebellion in Illinois. The spirited, sustained, and occasionally violent actions of demonstrators in protest of the federal government’s immigration policies and actions, without more, does not give rise to a danger of rebellion against the government’s authority. The administration thus has not demonstrated that it is likely to succeed on this issue.

The panel allowed Trump to keep Guard deployed, sitting in Illinois doing nothing. But they cannot patrol the streets.

Update: Trump has appealed to SCOTUS. Amy Coney Barrett has ordered Illinois to respond by Monday evening, but did not immediately overturn the stay.

Greg Bovino’s September 27 “Shitshow:” Batting 9% [Updated]

In Illinois’ Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order against Trump’s invasion, they describe how, on September 27, Greg Bovino drive three Chevy Tahoe’s into the Broadview police facility, promising a “shitshow,” later that day. That led to increased targeting of protestors and even journalists.

Around 7:00 a.m. on Saturday, September 27, three Chevrolet Tahoe SUVs appeared in the Broadview Police Department’s parking lot without invitation. 91 Federal agents, including Agent Bovino of the CBP, emerged from the vehicles with a message for the Broadview police: prepare for “a shitshow.”92 Specifically, federal agents, including Agent Bovino, told the Broadview police to expect increased use of chemical munitions and increased ICE activity in Broadview.93

That afternoon and evening, September 27, Agent Bovino and his colleagues followed through on their warning. Groups of federal agents repeatedly chased people on foot through the streets of Broadview in ongoing vehicle traffic.94 Around dusk, Agent Bovino and a large team of fatigue-clad, tactically equipped, and masked federal agents escorted multiple federal vehicles out of the ICE detention facility. 95 And, again, federal agents fired pepper balls, rubber bullets, and teargas cannisters at protestors.96 Over the course of the protests on September 26 and 27 in Broadview, DHS reported making a total of eleven arrests of protestors, though only five of the individuals arrested have been criminally charged. 97

[snip]

The actions of federal officials since the September 26 DHS-to-DOD memorandum belie the notion that the protests in Broadview exceed law enforcement’s capacity to address them. See 10 U.S.C. § 12406 (referring to inability to execute federal law with the “regular forces”). When confronted with a protest of approximately 100 people on the evening of September 27 outside the Broadview ICE facility, federal agents dispersed the protestors and arrested eleven people, including a journalist, in the process.140 Far from being overwhelmed by this protest, a DHS spokesperson bragged on social media about the number of arrests its agents made in response.

If the September 27 protest in Broadview had truly threatened to render the federal government incapable of executing federal law, then presumably the federal officials in charge of the ICE facility in Broadview would have focused their energy, attention, and resources on securing it the following day, September 28. Instead, CBP sent dozens of armed, fatigue-clad Border Patrol agents led by Agent Bovino through downtown Chicago—twelve miles removed from the ICE facility in Broadview.143 These actions are impossible to square with any good-faith argument from the federal government that it is unable to execute federal law in Broadview or anywhere else in Illinois.141 And although DHS declared all 200 people at the protest to be “rioters,” only eleven people had been arrested by federal agents, and, as of September 29, only five had been criminally charged by federal prosecutors.142

91 Id. [declaration of Broadview Police Chief Thomas Mills] ¶ 38.

92 Id.

93 Id.

94 “Agents chase after protesters, smoke and pepper bullets deployed outside Broadview ICE facility” ABC 7 Chicago (Sept. 26, 2025), available at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Byews1aX7XI.

95 “Protest continues outside ICE facility in Broadview,” CBS News (Sept. 27, 2025), available at https://www.cbsnews.com/chicago/video/protest-continues-outside-ice-facility-in-broadview/; see also Ex. 13, Declaration of Gil Kerlikowske (“Kerlikowske Decl.”), ¶¶ 46-51; Ex 15, Declaration of Commander Jacqueline Cepeda (Cepeda Decl.) at ¶ 8.

96 Ex. 4 (Mills Decl.) ¶¶ 35-36, 40.

97 Sabrina Franza, “Arrested Broadview ICE protestors appear in court; 2 held, 3 released,” CBS News Chicago (Sept. 29, 2025), available at: https://www.cbsnews.com/chicago/news/broadview-ice-facility-protesters-arrestcourt/.

[snip]

140 Ashlyn Wright, et al., “U.S. Border Patrol takes over security of Broadview ICE facility, protests continue over the weekend,” WGN (Sept. 27, 2025), available at: https://wgntv.com/news/operation-midway-blitz/protesters-rallyoutside-broadview-ice-facility-against-operation-midway-blitz/ (noting that “[a]bout 100 demonstrators” gathered outside the Broadview ICE facility” on Saturday, September 27); Cindy Hernandez, et al., “Broadview officials say ICE agents warned that mayor’s comments would bring consequences,” Chicago Sun-Times (Sept. 27, 2025), available at: https://chicago.suntimes.com/news/2025/09/27/ice-broadview-action-mayor-katrina-thompsonimmigration; @DHSgov, 8:50 a.m., Sept. 28, 2025 post on X.com, available at: https://x.com/DHSgov/status/1972297960319832252.

141 @DHSgov, 8:50 a.m., Sept. 28, 2025 post on X.com, available at: https://x.com/DHSgov/status/1972297960319832252.

142 ABC7 Chicago Digital Team, “Neurodivergent man among 5 protesters charged after clash at Broadview ICE facility, supporters say,” ABC7 (Sept. 29, 2025), available at: https://abc7chicago.com/post/ice-chicago-todayprotesters-expected-return-broadview-facility-weekend-clashes/17902425/. [my emphasis]

In the later discussion of the provocation, the filing noted that DHS called the eleven people arrested “violent rioters” in included two weapons that, DHS claimed, “were taken off rioters” at Broadview.

Two whole days ago, filing cited this story (at footnote 97), which noted that only five of the eleven claimed arrests were charged on the docket. The later section, as well as this story (at footnote 142), which noted that of those five, one was neurodivergent.

One of the people not formally challenged, as reflected in the lawsuit by Chicago’s civil society filed same day as Illinois’ lawsuit, journalist Stephen Held described being arrested at the “shitshow.”

The five cases that had been (and have been) filed by that point were:

  • Paul Ivery, the neurodivergent man, who tragically spoke to the cops and admitted he said, “I’ll fucking kill you right now,” to a senior Border Patrol official who admitted he “does not specifically recall what IVERY said to [him] given the commotion.” The government initially asked for him to be detained, but then agreed to his release.
  • Dana Briggs, whose hand a Border Patrol official grabbed to prevent him from handing his phone to a friend, after which (the complaint claims) Briggs hit the CBP officer in the wrist. The government agreed to his release on $10,000 unsecured bail.
  • Ray Collins and Jocelyne Robledo, a couple who were pushed as the Feds tried to extend a perimeter of the facility. In the process, the Feds found (and put in their social media post) that each had weapons. Collins, who allegedly pushed back, was detained. He filed for release, noting that the weapons he and his partner both had were licensed Concealed Carry weapons. He was released on bail on October 2.
  • Hubert Mazur. Even the complaint admits that the the alleged Border Patrol victim pushed Mazur first, which led both of them to fall to the ground. He was released on his how recognizance.

Yesterday, a day before his preliminary hearing, the government moved to dismiss the case against Mazur. the docket minute explains that when the government reviewed the video evidence of the incident, they decided they could not even charge a misdemeanor.

The government provided additional basis for its motion, noting that the government’s review, after defendant’s arrest, of additional body-worn camera video evidence caused the government to decide not to file an information in this case, in which the compliant charged the case as a misdemeanor. Further, the government confirmed on the record that prior to issuance of the complaint, the complaint affiant had sworn under oath that the affiant had reviewed video evidence that corroborated the complaint’s version of events. The Court confirmed at the hearing that such sworn affirmation was a substantial part of the basis for the Court’s initial determination of probable cause on the complaint.

This morning, the government moved to dismiss the cases against Collins and Robledo. The docket minutes for today’s hearing on the dismissal confirmed (as had been reported elsewhere) that the grand jury no billed an indictment against this couple.

The government provided additional bases for its motion, stating that a U.S. grand jury on 10/7/25 returned a “no bill” as to these defendants and thus declined to return an indictment against them. Further, the government confirmed on the record that the complaint affiant swore under oath that the affiant had reviewed video evidence that corroborated the complaint’s version of events, and the Court confirmed that such sworn affirmation was a substantial part of the basis for the Court’s initial determination of probable cause on the complaint.

There are, admittedly, several sealed dockets. NDIL still has not docketed the case of the alleged Latin King member charged with soliciting a plot against Greg Bovino, and if there were any unsealed charges filed against the people from the South Shore apartment raid, it’s only two guys arrested on warrants for a narcotics case in Texas that doesn’t mention any gang involvement.

But as of right now, those eleven charges of which DHS boasted have turned into two.

Greg Bovino, who promised a shitshow, is batting just 18% on remaining public charges, less than two weeks out.

Update: Here’s Block Club Chicago’s report on the dismissed charges, which includes interviews.

“I’ve been practicing law for 54 years and I’ve never had another client with no bill returned,” said Richard Kling, an attorney representing Collins. “This is a once-in-a-lifetime for me.”

[snip]

Kling said his client, who had also previously been jailed for more than two days following his arrest last month, was “obviously relieved” but he cautioned that prosecutors have said they still have 2 1/2 weeks to determine whether to pursue other charges related to the arrest.

On Wednesday, citing the adage that a grand jury could indict a ham sandwich, Kling told Block Club that prosecutors apparently had “less evidence than a ham sandwich” against his client.

“The grand jury, I hope, took the position that people have a right to protest,” Kling said. “They decided that the First Amendment is more important than criminal charges.”

Update: And … NDIL just moved to dismiss the Ivrey complaint — the one where he seemingly confessed.

Update: Once again, in dismissing the charges, Chicago judges are laying a record that the affiant in these cases did not do their due diligence.

ORDER as to Paul Ivery (1): Hearing held on the government’s motion to dismiss the complaint without prejudice (doc. # 10 ). The government provided additional bases for its motion on the record. Further, the government confirmed on the record that the complaint affiant swore under oath that the affiant had reviewed video evidence that corroborated the complaint’s version of events, and the Court confirmed that such sworn affirmation was a substantial part of the basis for the Court’s initial determination of probable cause on the complaint. The government made an oral motion to vacate the release order, noting that vacatur of the order is part and parcel of case dismissal. For the reasons stated on the record, the Court: (1) granted the oral motion to vacate the release order (doc. # 8 ), and (2) granted the motion to dismiss (doc. # 10 ) without prejudice without objection. The release order (doc. # 8 ) is vacated. The case is dismissed without prejudice. Signed by the Honorable Gabriel A. Fuentes on 10/10/2025. Mailed notice (aee, ) (Entered: 10/14/2025)

Governor Pritzker Argues Trump Is Invading Illinois Out of Animus

Very broadly speaking, the state three challenges to Trump’s invasions adopt different theories.

  • The 22-page California challenge (the TRO request was filed separately), which was filed during large scale protests, contested whether the scale of the protest merited nationalization of the Guard and invasion by the Marines
  • The 41-page Oregon challenge basically showed that Trump’s batshit claims about Portland don’t match the reality on the ground, noting that to the extent there were significant protests, they subsided long before Trump called in the Guard
  • The 69-page Illinois challenge argues that the invasion arises out of animus

Of those 69 pages in the Illinois suit, 21 are dedicated to describing Trump’s animus, which it dates as starting in 2013, continued though his first presidential term, and even came out during the interregnum.

44. The supposed current emergency is belied by the fact that Trump’s Chicago troop deployment threats began more than ten years ago. In a social media post from 2013 Trump writes “we need our troops on the streets of Chicago, not in Syria.”

[snip]

47. Three years ago, in 2022, Trump was between his presidential terms. In two separate speeches that summer, Trump shared his plans for Chicago, stating in July 2022 that the “next president needs to send the National Guard to the most dangerous neighborhoods in Chicago.” He reiterated that point at the August 2022 CPAC speech, saying that the problem was “these cities that were run by Democrats going so bad so fast.”

It shows how Trump and Stephen Miller’s targeting

57. On April 18, 2025, Stephen Miller, White House Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy and the Homeland Security Advisor leveled the accusation that “Sanctuary cities shield criminal illegal aliens from removal.” Although not a lawyer, he opined that “these cities are engaged in systemic criminal violations and that they are engaged in a scheme to nullify and obstruct the duly enacted laws of the United States of America.” Miller specifically cited Chicago, along with Los Angeles and Boston, saying the cities were “waging war against the very idea of nationhood.”

It showed how, in May, DHS ditched its first draft list of sanctuary jurisdictions to get rid of the Republican ones on the list.

63. In the midst of these immigration-related federal defunding actions and responsive lawsuits, DHS published, on May 29, 2025, a list of 500 purported “sanctuary jurisdictions” around the country. It accused them of “shamefully obstructing” the Trump administration’s deportation plans and “shielding dangerous criminal aliens.” Fox News Channel 32 Chicago accurately characterized the list as an escalation of “efforts to penalize states and cities that limit cooperation with federal immigration authorities.”

64. However, days later, based on widespread news reporting as early as June 1st, that first sanctuary jurisdiction list was gone. As reported, very soon after publishing the list, the Trump administration faced objections from Republican stronghold jurisdictions that found themselves on the list. The Department of Homeland Security quickly and quietly removed the list from the website where it had been posted.

65. Then on July 25, 2025, the federal district judge presiding over the United States’ lawsuit regarding Illinois’s, Chicago’s and Cook County’s immigration-related laws and policies dismissed the case. United States v. Illinois, No. 25 CV 1285, 2025 WL 2098688, *27 (N.D. Ill. July 25, 2025). In concluding that there was no claim for the United States to pursue, the court held that “the Sanctuary Policies reflect [Illinois’s, Chicago’s and Cook County’s] decision to not participate in enforcing civil immigration law—a decision protected by the Tenth Amendment and not preempted by the INA. Finding that these same Policy provisions constitute discrimination or impermissible regulation would provide an end-run around the Tenth Amendment. It would allow the federal government to commandeer States under the guise of intergovernmental immunity— the exact type of direct regulation of states barred by the Tenth Amendment.” Id.

66. Less than two weeks later, the Trump administration posted a new version of its sanctuary jurisdiction target list. That August 5, 2025, publication shortened the list from about 500 to just 35 jurisdictions. The new sanctuary “jurisdiction” list targeted twelve states (including Illinois, California, and Oregon), the District of Columbia, eighteen cities (including Chicago), and four counties (including Cook County).

It tracks a number of things Kristi Noem and Greg Bovino did to create a pretext for invasion, focusing closely on Bovino’s boat trips around the river, but also describing the way Noem went out of the way to address protestors directly (the Chief of Police of Broadview was pretty unhappy about that event).

106. As this DHS show of force in Broadview was escalating, CBP appeared in tactical gear with large weapons in hand around the City of Chicago. On September 25, 2025, Greg Bovino, head of the CBP operations in Chicago, led a small fleet of “Border Patrol” boats downtown on the Chicago River, with officers armed with semi-automatic rifles. Photographs in the local news showed the boats passing the upscale Riverwalk, in the area of the Trump Tower:

107. The CBP boats were seen again on the Chicago River in the following days, seemingly doing nothing more than eponymous showboating.

108. However, the day after the Border Protection’s first unimpeded river fleet cruise, DHS executed a memo expressing an urgent need for support in Illinois from the “Department of War.” Specifically, on September 26, DHS requested from DoD 100 troops to protect ICE facilities in Illinois with “immediate and sustained assistance” because of a fictional “coordinated assault by violent groups . . . actively aligned with designated domestic terror organizations . . . .” DoD’s National Guard Bureau informally made this request to Illinois for its National Guard troops on September 27, which Illinois refused the following day.

109. Two days after this request, on Sunday, September 28, around 100 DHS agents, dressed in militaristic tactical gear and carrying semi-automatic rifles, patrolled the Chicago business district near Millenium Park and Michigan Avenue. They positioned themselves in large groups on major pedestrian thoroughfares in tourist and commercial areas.

[snip]

112. On October 3rd, 2025, Kristi Noem, the United States Secretary of Homeland Security, orchestrated a visit to the Broadview facility designed to provoke those who could hear or see the visit. Throughout this visit, rather than avoiding the protesters, Secretary Noem and her entourage, including Bovino, entered areas congested with protesters, even when there were alternative routes that would have avoided those areas.

113. Defendant Noem was videotaped speaking to assembled DHS agents about protestors outside of the ICE facility in which she stated: “Today, when we leave here we’re going to go hard. We’re going to hammer these guys that are advocating for violence against the American people . . . we’re going to go out there and we’re going to make sure that there’s consequences for the way that they’re behaving and that we’re going to prosecute them” Noem’s comments about protestors “advocating for violence against the American people” are unsupported by public reports, and appear to conflate the First Amendment-protected speech of protestors with political violence.

114. Noem then introduced Bovino, who began his speech saying, “It’s roll up time here, state instrument is a hard power, you’re going to be put into full effect.” Although at that time demonstrators were confined to a free speech area blocks from the ICE facility, and managed by ISP and local police, Bovino called demonstrators an “unsafe crowd.” He further stated, “we’re going to roll them all the way out of here, and when they resist what happens? They get arrested. So it’s now going to be a free arrest zone . . . I’m giving them one warning . . . They’re getting it here as soon as we leave.”

115. Subsequently, Secretary Noem’s motorcade, in a large armored, tactical vehicle known as a BearCat, exited the facility through an entrance congested with protesters, rather than the alternative, which was not. She then proceeded to an area with protesters on all sides and exited the vehicle. Because she affirmatively went to the protest area, the U.S. Secret Service was required to extend the protective perimeter, resulting in federal agents engaging with protesters and prompting ISP involvement. There was no legitimate purpose under federal law for this conduct by defendant Noem.

Sadly, they didn’t describe Russian useful idiot Benny Johnson’s role in all this, because his false claims are a key part of the effort to stoke violence (and, probably, to mislead Trump about what is really happening).

It cites a number of Trump’s false Truth Social claims and fundraising emails, including this one from September 6.

And it describes Trump’s incendiary language to describe peaceful protest, including his declaration of a war from within.

120. A few days later, on September 30 at the Pentagon, Trump and Hegseth addressed a gathering of about 800 top military leaders. Trump took the opportunity again to attack Chicago, stating: “You know, the Democrats run most of the cities that are in bad shape. We have many cities in great shape too, by the way. I want you to know that. But it seems that the ones that are run by the radical left Democrats, what they’ve done to San Francisco, Chicago, New York, Los Angeles, they’re very unsafe places and we’re going to straighten them out one by one.” He went on to say, “And this is going to be a major part for some of the people in this room. That’s a war too. It’s a war from within.”

121. Trump then stated that he had informed defendant Hegseth, “we should use some of these dangerous cities as training grounds for our military National Guard, but military, because we’re going into Chicago very soon.” Defendant Hegseth has now taken formal action to do so.

It used Trump’s invitation for Pete Hegseth to use Chicago as a “training ground” as the introduction of the rest of the complaint.

The complaint describes the shooting of a Chicago man and the lies DHS told about it. The Black Hawk invasion of an apartment building appears elsewhere, to show that there was no interruption of whatever that invasion was meant to be. It doesn’t mention the shooting on Saturday: but emails submitted by the ILNG show that Trump had already made the request for Guard before that event (though they happened nearly simultaneously).

I’ve seen some people speculate, because of more recent events, that Chicago would have a tougher time than Portland to prove there was no purpose for the invasion.

But this is a different, more ambitious argument, effectively showing that Kristi Noem set out to create a pretext for a long contemplated plan to invade Chicago.