Comment by donkeybeer 3 days ago
What warrant it was has no bearing in whether he, not an individual related to any immigration case being investigated has the right to film it.
Most of the warrants being used in the minnesota botch job are the Karen warrants from what can be found anyways.
You seem to have difficulty with English, maybe its not your main language. What part of the warrant type being immaterial for third parties having a right to film the cops was difficult to understand?
Why do you say "not all warrants are the same" while them being different is immaterial?
Also, why even "protest" at these events when the people targeted by ICE haven't determined to be illegal immigrants? They can just present their basis for legal immigration and be done with it.
Ask ICE why they are acting like violent terrorists. Why are you asking protestors who have a legal right to free speech, to carry firearms, to protest in a public space and to film in a public space?
You are probably from one of the lesser countries in the world which is why your confusion. In sane countries people don't need "permission" from the government to engage in speech.
I spoke about warrants because you are the one who brought up "court orders" out of thin air and you clearly showed you had completely made it up since you neither knew about the fake Karen warrants and nor about the proportion of real court orders and fake warrants. I can print a paper saying "Ultra Real Serious Warrant for Arrest of kreetx" too. Would you listen to me and get arrested by me?
I'm sure an investigation into this particular case will surface what kind of warrant (or other legal document) they were carrying out and whether whistling along with police carrying out their work was interference or not.
If you know who was going to be captured and how this was only a "Karen" warrant , which doesn't constitute non-interferable police work, post to any source!