SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
donald trump
'To Instill Widespread Fear Is the Point': Trump Plots Chicago Immigration Raids
"It's a performance with serious costs for immigrant communities," said one critic. "And it's a performance to help sell their greater authoritarian agenda."
Jan 18, 2025
Citing four unnamed sources, The Wall Street Journalreported late Friday that U.S. President-elect Donald Trump's administration intends to start delivering on his long-promised mass deportations with "a large-scale immigration raid" in Chicago, Illinois that "is expected to begin on Tuesday morning, a day after Trump is inaugurated, and will last all week."
"The Trump team intends to target immigrants in the country illegally with criminal backgrounds—many of whose offenses, like driving violations, made them too minor for the Biden administration to pursue," according to the newspaper. "But, the people cautioned, if anyone else in the country illegally is present during an arrest, they will be taken, too."
After considering which "sanctuary cities" to target, "they settled on Chicago both because of the large number of immigrants who could be possible targets and because of the Trump team's high-profile feud with the city's Democratic Mayor Brandon Johnson," the Journal detailed. "Large immigrant centers, such as New York, Los Angeles, Denver, and Miami, are also in the incoming administration's sights, and more targeted raids could come."
The Trump transition team, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and representatives for Johnson and Gov. JB Pritzker did not respond to the paper's request for comment, but the Democratic governor on Saturday circulated "know your rights" resources from the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights on his social media accounts and pledged to "protect those rights and ensure our state laws are followed."
Every family and child deserves to feel safe and secure in the place they call home. Every resident of Illinois should know their rights. I intend to protect those rights and ensure our state laws are followed.
[image or embed]
— Governor JB Pritzker ( @govpritzker.illinois.gov) January 18, 2025 at 12:36 PM
As that resource sheet notes, people questioned by ICE officers have the right to remain silent, and the federal agency's officers must have a warrant signed by a judge to enter a private residence without consent.
The Chicago Sun-Timesreported that "Beatriz Ponce de Leon, deputy mayor for immigrant, migrant, and refugee rights, warned City Council members of the impending street sweeps during a series of virtual briefings Friday" and advocates are "organizing 'know your rights' workshops and distributing cards in Latino neighborhoods with bilingual information on residents' legal rights."
Under the Welcoming City Ordinance, the Chicago Police Department does not document immigration status or share information with federal immigration authorities. WGN9pointed out that "Chicago Public Schools, the Chicago Transit Authority, the Chicago Park District, and Community Colleges of Chicago have all been directed not to allow ICE access into any of its buildings."
According toThe New York Times, which spoke with two unnamed sources and obtained related correspondence, "hundreds of agents were asked to volunteer" for ICE's "Operation Safeguard," and the agency plans to send roughly 150 agents to Chicago.
Tom Homan, Trump's incoming "border czar" and former acting director of ICE, previewed the administration's targeting of the Illinois city while attending a Northwest Side GOP holiday party last month, telling other attendees that "Chicago's in trouble because your mayor sucks and your governor sucks," and if Johnson "doesn't want to help, get the hell out of the way."
The reports about the massive raids in Chicago confirmes much about the mass deportation regime. 1 Homan is in charge 2 raids are weapon to be selectively wheeled at political opponents - yes it’s about targeting the undoc but also the Dem mayor 3 the staged performance is their key objective
[image or embed]
— Zachary A Mueller ( @zacharyamueller.bsky.social) January 18, 2025 at 10:16 AM
In a social media thread about the reported plans for Chicago, Zachary Mueller, senior research director at the advocacy group America's Voice, said that Trump's administration "will parade out some number of immigrants who have committed serious crimes, to sell the lie that this is about protecting the American people. It's not."
"Don't fall for their trap," Mueller continued. "There will be arrests in other cities to say that this is not weaponized raids as [a] political attack on political opponents. But the [performance] to instill widespread fear is the point. Fear to immigrant communities. Fear to any elected official not in a major city of the cost of speaking out."
"Homan wants a confrontation. They want to perform the narrative for their audience they are taking it to the 'enemy within," Mueller added. "It's a performance with serious costs for immigrant communities. And it's a performance to help sell their greater authoritarian agenda."
Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, a senior fellow at the American Immigration Council, responded similarly, saying Friday: "The actual operation described in the piece (100-200 agents) seems not that unusual for ICE (Google Operation Cross-Check). Expect a PR blitz, though."
"Not to diminish... the impact, but from [the Journal's] reporting it seems that the scale of this is entirely precedented. ICE has done similar operations in the past. This seems mostly about generating media," Reichlin-Melnick explained.
"As many people have said, it is going to take time for the Trump administration to ramp up immigration enforcement," he added. "In the meantime, however, they are going to basically slap a 'mass deportation' logo on the side of every regular ICE operation."
In addition to sounding the alarm over how Trump's mass deportations are expected to impact the estimated 11.7 million undocumented immigrants in the United States and their families, migrant rights advocates and experts have warned that the plan, if fully implemented, "would deliver a catastrophic blow to the U.S. economy."
Although Trump won't be president again until his Monday inauguration, Republicans on Capitol Hill are already pushing forward the GOP's anti-migrant agenda, with help from some Democrats in Congress. On Friday, 10 Democratic senators voted with Republicans to advance the Laken Riley Act, setting it up for a final vote next week.
Those 10 Democrats are Sens. Catherine Cortez Masto (Nev.), Ruben Gallego (Ariz.), Maggie Hassan (N.H.), Mark Kelly (Ariz.), Jon Ossoff (Ga.), Gary Peters (Mich.), Jacky Rosen (Nev.), Jeanne Shaheen (N.H.), Elissa Slotkin (Mich.), and Mark Warner (Va.). Gallego and Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.), who did not vote on Friday, also co-sponsored the bill.
"The process displayed by Democrats during the Laken Riley Act legislative debate is an alarming first sign of acquiescence to Donald Trump and Stephen Miller," said America's Voice executive director Vanessa Cárdenas, referring to the family separation architect set to serve as the president-elect's homeland security adviser and deputy chief of staff for policy.
"Greenlighting a massive increase in unnecessary detention and empowering the radical anti-immigrant state attorneys general is deeply harmful and undermines the solutions we need," she stressed. "Despite Donald Trump's victory and the prominence of his vicious anti-immigrant pledges, a strong majority of the American public prefers a balanced approach to immigration, involving both border security and legalization for undocumented immigrants, instead of mass deportation."
According to Cárdenas' group, a coalition of nearly two dozen organizations including Families for Freedom, United We Dream, and multiple state arms of Make the Road are launching a nationwide week of action scheduled to begin Monday in California, Connecticut, Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Kansas, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Texas, Virginia, and Washington, D.C.
Keep ReadingShow Less
The LA Fires Show the Price of Climate Inaction
Measures like controlled burns, increased funding for fire departments, and more thoughtful residential planning can help California going forward, but it will take more to slash emissions and address the climate emergency.
Jan 18, 2025
If you grew up in Southern California, you don’t need a weather person to know which way the Santa Ana winds blow.
These dry winds originate in the Great Basin and sweep down the mountains toward the Southern California coast. They lower the humidity and raise the temperature, creating critical fire weather conditions. “The wind shows us how close to the edge we are,” Joan Didion once observed in her essay “Los Angeles Notebook.”
The Santa Anas typically occur during the fall. But more and more often, they’re happening this time of year. In tandem, the changing climate is making Southern California drier.
Disturbingly, President-elect Donald Trump, a climate change denier, intends to gut even the inadequate measures that the U.S. has already taken.
This January, ferocious gusts up to 100 miles per hour overlapped with a months-long drought to create the conditions for the apocalyptic infernos now devastating Greater Los Angeles. The Eaton and Palisades fires—among the most destructive in California history—have together consumed over 37,000 acres. Losses could top $100 billion, according to AccuWeather.
Seeing the Eaton fire’s menacing flames from my family’s San Gabriel Valley home, driving past thick smoke and fallen palm fronds on the freeway, and receiving a mistaken evacuation alert showed me what “close to the edge” can look like. While we’ve been spared for now, many others have lost their homes, livelihoods, and a part of their families’ history.
The fires have forced tens of thousands to evacuate their homes, destroyed over 12,300 structures, and killed at least 25 people. Some victims died while trying to protect their homes, like Victor Shaw, 66, found outside his Altadena house clutching a garden hose.
The fires have ravaged lower-income communities, historic Black neighborhoods in Altadena, and cultural landmarks like actor Will Rogers’ historic ranch house in the Pacific Palisades. Mass displacement is exacerbating the housing crisis in Los Angeles County, where roughly 75,000 unhoused people are now directly exposed to toxic smoke. Wildlife and pets haven’t been spared either.
The climate emergency has worsened this destruction. As the fires burned, scientists confirmed that 2024 was the world’s warmest year on record. Dramatic swings between intensely wet and dry weather—described by climate scientist Daniel Swain as “hydroclimate whiplash”—are increasing worldwide, resulting in more dangerous floods along with droughts that amplify wildfire risks.
Average global temperatures have now exceeded the Paris agreement threshold of 1.5°C (2.7°F) above preindustrial levels. To avoid further catastrophe, fossil fuel emissions must be slashed by 43% by 2030 and reach “net zero” by 2050, according to the United Nations.
Disturbingly, President-elect Donald Trump, a climate change denier, intends to gut even the inadequate measures that the U.S. has already taken. He’s widely expected to withdraw our nation—the biggest historical emitter of carbon dioxide—from the Paris agreement, as he did during his first administration, and he’s said he intends to cancel President Joe Biden’s historic investments in green jobs.
The result of these actions will be more heat and extreme weather.
Communities across the Southeast are still reeling from Hurricanes Helene and Milton in September and October, which killed over 250 people and caused over $100 billion in damages. Warmer ocean temperatures are supercharging these and other storms.
Measures like controlled burns, increased funding for fire departments, and more thoughtful residential planning in wildfire-prone areas can help California going forward, but it will take more to slash emissions and address the climate emergency.
Fossil fuel companies should be held accountable as well. The state of California is currently suing them for deceiving the public for decades about their products’ central role in the climate crisis and demanding that they pay for billions of dollars in damages. These latest fires should be added to the list.
Amid Angelenos banding together and vowing to rebuild what they’ve lost, the fires are yet another tragic reminder of how people and our planet pay the ultimate price for climate inaction.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Will Pete Hegseth’s Nomination Bring Us Closer to Mutually Assured Destruction?
Hegseth seems to represent the attitude that security is about being the toughest guy out there, security is about winning, and the pursuit of “peace” is for wimps.
Jan 18, 2025
Uh oh, nukes coming in. Should we retaliate?
This strikes me as the stupidest question a human being could ask—and, just possibly, also the last. Our enemy of the moment is loosing hell on us (if warning signals are accurate), so let’s do the same back at them. If we kill more of them than they kill of us, we win! Yes, human life—all life—will likely be destroyed in a nuclear war, but that’s just the way things work. That’s not our concern.
Among the global superpowers, this scenario remains etched into the meaning of self-defense: the ability to retaliate, no matter the consequences of doing so. The marketing slogan, of course, is “deterrence.” As long as the bad guys understand that we have the capability to retaliate, they won’t start a nuclear war. Hence, staying safe as a nation means maintaining our ability to create Armageddon.
It’s certainly the human paradox of the era. Are we stuck with it?
I fear the era of “greatness” the American right is yearning for goes back at least to the Middle Ages, which is to say, far enough back in time so that actual reality is subsumed by legend.
Well, that’s the question I’m asking right now. It’s the question most of humanity is struggling with in one way or another, although not, of course, at the highest levels of power, where wars remain a global certainty and the threat of nuclear war is humanity’s . . . uh, salvation. Apparently.
And thus, as The New York Times explains, “With Russia at war, China escalating regional disputes and nations like North Korea and Iran expanding their nuclear programs, the United States is set to spend an estimated $1.7 trillion over 30 years to revamp its own arsenal.”
“The spending spree, which the government began planning in 2010, is underway in at least 23 states—nearly 50 if you include subcontractors. It follows a decades-long freeze on designing, building or testing new nuclear weapons. Along with the subs, the military is paying for a new fleet of bomber jets, land-based missiles, and thermonuclear warheads. Tally all that spending, and the bill comes to almost $57 billion a year, or $108,000 per minute for three decades.”
And, oh yeah, the U.S. Department of Defense, according to theBulletin of the Atomic Scientists, currently maintains approximately 3,700 nuclear warheads, most of which “are not deployed but rather stored for potential upload onto missiles and aircraft as necessary. We estimate that approximately 1,770 warheads are currently deployed...“
And by the way, the Bulletin currently has its Doomsday Clock set at 90 seconds to midnight. That is to say, the world is trembling at the very edge of MADness, a.k.a., mutually assured destruction. Is there no way beyond this insanity? Shouldn’t addressing this, along with the expanding planetary climate crisis, be the number one priority not simply of ordinary citizens like you and me, but of the politically powerful? As a starting point, how do we create the context for global nuclear disarmament?
Into the midst of this madness comes—at the behest of President-elect Donald Trump—Pete Hegseth, his nominee for secretary of defense... the Fox News Channel host, the guy who has said he wants to give the department its old name back: the Department of War. Maybe the Senate will approve his controversial nomination, maybe it won’t. But the fact that he’s the one currently under consideration illustrates the limited consciousness of those at the peak of American power: Security is about being the toughest guy out there. Security is about winning. And the pursuit of “peace” is for wimps.
Hegseth seems to represent the essence of that attitude—a white Christian nationalist who draws his MAGA certainties from the old days, when the world was neatly divided into two parts, good and evil, and defeating evil was the work of manly men and pretty much all that mattered.
The Associated Press provides a brief snapshot into the Hegseth soul: “Hegseth complains in his latest book that ‘woke’ generals and the leaders of the elite service academies have left the military dangerously weak and ‘effeminate’ by promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion. He says rank and file soldiers are undermined by ‘feckless civilian leaders and foolish brass,’ adding that ‘the next commander in chief will need to clean house...’”
“Hegseth’s writing,” the AP story continues, “is contemptuous of the policies, laws, and treaties that constrain warfighters on the battlefield, from restrictive rules of engagement to the Geneva Conventions, which he suggests are outdated against enemies who don’t abide by them.”
“He has little patience for the moral questions surrounding war. Of the Americans who dropped nuclear bombs on Japan to end World War II, he writes, ‘They won. Who cares?’”
His focus, he has said, is making the military more lethal, and to that end, his body is plastered with moralistic tattoos, including a crusader’s cross on his chest and the Latin phrase “Deus Vult” on his bicep, which, according to the Daily Beast, means “God Wills It.” The term dates back to the Christian crusaders of the Middle Ages and “is now associated with right-wing extremism.”
Wow, the Crusades—and nuclear-armed crusaders! How could America, how could the world, be any safer than this?
As I say, the Hegseth nomination may not get approved, but the nomination itself is wearing a MAGA hat. I fear the era of “greatness” the American right is yearning for goes back at least to the Middle Ages, which is to say, far enough back in time so that actual reality is subsumed by legend: valiant good charging forward, conquering groveling evil. Those were definitely the good old days.
But my point here is not simply to denigrate Trump, Hegseth, and the MAGA right. The centrist Dems are equally committed to war, including that multi-trillion-dollar investment in nuclear weapons upgrade. Not to mention genocide in Palestine and a world committed to going MAD.
We can do better. We have no choice.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular