DHS fires back at Democrats for 'beyond the pale' rhetoric as ICE agents face wave of violent threats
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is continuing to call on Democrats to tone down the rhetoric against Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents as riots not only persisted in Los Angeles Sunday night, but agents continue to face threats of doxxing and violence.
The department has taken issue with not only California leaders but also House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, Boston Mayor Michelle Wu and Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz.
"The violent targeting of law enforcement in Los Angeles by lawless rioters is despicable and Mayor Bass and Governor Newsom must call for it to end," DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said in a Saturday statement. "The men and women of ICE put their lives on the line to protect and defend the lives of American citizens."
Acting Ice Director Calls Mayor Wu's Neo-nazi Comparison 'Disgusting' Amid Increase In Agent Assaults
"Make no mistake, Democrat politicians like Hakeem Jeffries, Mayor Wu of Boston, Tim Walz, and Mayor Bass of Los Angeles are contributing to the surge in assaults of our ICE officers through their repeated vilification and demonization of ICE," McLaughlin stated. "From comparisons to the modern-day Nazi Gestapo to glorifying rioters, the violent rhetoric of these sanctuary politicians is beyond the pale. This violence against ICE must end." The department says there's been a 413% increase in assaults against ICE agents, which comes as the riots in Los Angeles are centered against the presence of the agency in the city.
Wu and Jeffries recently faced criticism for their comments on ICE agents masking while conducting sweeps to conceal their identity for safety reasons."Every single ICE agent who is engaged in this aggressive overreach and are trying to hide their identities from the American people will be unsuccessful in doing that," Jeffries said on Capitol Hill.
Read On The Fox News App
"This is America. This is not the Soviet Union," he added, saying identification is needed to comply with the law and have proper "transparency." "We're not behind the Iron Curtain. This is not the 1930s. And every single one of them, no matter what it takes, no matter how long it takes, will of course be identified."
Wu was slammed for comments where she drew a tie between ICE and neo-Nazi group Nationalist Social Club-131 for the masking decision, which DHS called "sickening," according to the Boston Herald.
Federal Officials Slam Democrats For 'Dangerous' Rhetoric As Ice Agents Face Violent Mobs In La, Nyc
"I don't know of any police department that routinely wears masks," Wu said. "We know that there are other groups that routinely wear masks. NSC-131 routinely wears masks."
Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, who was the Democratic vice presidential nominee in 2024, also controversially drew a comparison to the Nazis in May.
Click Here For More Immigration Coverage
"I'm gonna start with the flashing red light — Donald Trump's modern-day Gestapo is scooping folks up off the streets," Walz claimed at a University of Minnesota law school commencement speech. "They're in unmarked vans, wearing masks, being shipped off to foreign torture dungeons. No chance to mount a defense. Not even a chance to kiss a loved one goodbye. Just grabbed up by masked agents, shoved into those vans, and disappeared."
In California, the anti-ICE riots triggered an order from President Donald Trump to deploy to the National Guard, which Newsom is expected to take legal action against. Newsom repeatedly has said that the Trump administration has instigated the situation "to manufacture chaos and violence," and has said that those who are committing "violent acts" will face legal repercussions and are playing into the president's hands.
Ice Official Puts Politicians On Blast, Demanding They 'Stop Putting My People In Danger'
"Continued chaotic federal sweeps, across California, to meet an arbitrary arrest quota are as reckless as they are cruel," Newsom stated Friday. "Donald Trump's chaos is eroding trust, tearing families apart, and undermining the workers and industries that power America's economy."
Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass called on residents not to "engage in violence and chaos" and to not "give the administration what they want," Sunday in an X post, but faced scrutiny for Friday comments saying that "these tactics sow terror in our communities and disrupt basic principles of safety in our city."
When Fox News Digital reached out to Newsom's office about DHS' comments, they sent a link to a post in which Acting ICE Director Todd Lyons credited Newsom for complying with ICE detainers for those already behind bars.
Fox News Digital reached out to the offices of Wu, Bass, Walz and Jeffries and did not receive replies.Original article source: DHS fires back at Democrats for 'beyond the pale' rhetoric as ICE agents face wave of violent threats
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Atlantic
19 minutes ago
- Atlantic
The Anniversary That Democrats Would Be Wise to Forget
Yesterday marked one year since Joe Biden's debate meltdown against Donald Trump. Happy anniversary to those who observe such things, or are triggered by such things. Please celebrate responsibly. For Democrats, the debacle was a harsh awakening and the start of an ongoing spiral. Prior to that night, they could hold on to the delusion that the party might somehow eke out one last victory from Biden's degraded capacity and ward off another four-year assault from Donald Trump. But that all exploded into the gruesome reality of June 27, 2024. Every interested viewer that night remembers where they were, their various feelings (depending on their perspectives) of revulsion, grief, glee, or disbelief. I was watching at home, thinking for some reason that Biden might exceed his humble expectations. He had managed to do this periodically on big stages during his presidency—including the feisty State of the Union address he'd turned in a few months earlier. But by the time Biden walked to his podium in Atlanta, it was clear that was not happening. Something was off. The elderly president looked visibly stiffer than usual, like he was wrapped in cardboard. As co-moderator Jake Tapper of CNN unfurled his opening question—about rising grocery and home prices—Biden's eyes bugged out, as if he was stunned. His face was a drab gray color. I remember thinking there was something wrong with my TV, until the texts started rolling in. A friend observed that Biden looked 'mummified' on the stage. 'Is he sick?' my wife asked as she entered the room. Not a great start. And this was before Biden had even said a word. Then he spoke—or tried to. Biden's voice didn't really work at first. It was raspy; he kept stopping, starting, dry-coughing. After a few sentences, everything was worse. 'Oh my god,' came another text, which was representative of the early returns. 'My mother told me she's crying,' read another. (This person's mother is evidently not a Trump supporter.) My wife left the room. Mark Leibovich: Where is Barack Obama? Now here we are a year later. Democrats have been battered by events since. First among them was Trump's victory in November, in which traditional Democratic constituencies such as Black, Hispanic, and young voters defected to the GOP in large numbers. This was followed by the onslaught of Trump's second administration. Democrats keep getting described (or describing themselves) as being 'in the wilderness,' though at this point 'the wilderness' might be a generous description; it at least offers peace and quiet—as opposed to, say, your average Democratic National Committee meeting in 2025. Or, for that matter, the aftermath of this week's Democratic primary in the New York City mayor's race. Zohran Mamdani, a democratic socialist state assemblyman from Queens, became an instant It Boy with his upset of scandal-soiled former Governor Andrew Cuomo. As happens with many progressive sensations these days, Mamdani's victory was immediately polarizing. New York Democrats seem split over the result: On one side are lukewarm establishment titans such as Senate and House Minority Leaders Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries; on the other are progressive demigods such as Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Senator Bernie Sanders. The usual Democratic divides revealed themselves: insurgent versus establishment, socialist-adjacent versus moderate, young versus old (except for Bernie, the ageless octogenarian forever big with the kids). The deeply unpopular incumbent, Eric Adams, who was elected as a Democrat in 2021, is running for reelection as an independent; despite getting trounced in the primary, Cuomo plans to stay in the race—running on something called the 'Fight and Deliver' ballot line. Mamdani is the clear favorite to prevail in November. But no one knows anything for sure, except that everything feels like a muddled mess, which has pretty much been the Democrats' default posture since the Abomination in Atlanta a year ago. The party's grass roots are showing genuine energy these days. Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez drew five-figure crowds at their 'Fighting Oligarchy' rallies this spring. The nationwide 'No Kings' protests two weekends ago were indicative of a galvanized protest movement eager to be led. Yet these signs of Trump resistance are mostly happening separate from the Democratic apparatus. As my colleague David Graham recently wrote, the 'No Kings' spectacles were themselves, paradoxically, a sign of how rudderless the party now finds itself. With a few exceptions, the Democratic leadership ranks have been largely AWOL. They toggle and flail between quiet paralysis and loud frustration, especially with one another. Mark Leibovich: The week that changed everything for Gavin Newsom Democrats have spent an inordinate amount of time and energy relitigating Biden's tenure in the White House—whether he was fit to be there and how frail he had become. The phrase cognitive decline still comes up a lot, for obvious reasons, none of them fun or especially constructive. The 2024 campaign has also come in for a spirited rehash —especially among factions of Biden world, the Kamala Harris–Tim Walz campaign, and the various PACs and outside groups ostensibly designed to support them. Republicans have of course relished every chance to revisit Biden's deterioration. The media have hammered this theme as well, most notably Tapper and his co-author, Alex Thompson of Axios, whose blockbuster autopsy, Original Sin, has been at or near the top of The New York Times ' nonfiction best-seller list for several weeks. The surest way for Democrats to move on would be to jump straight to the future: Look to 2028, as quickly as possible. Presidential campaigns at their best can be forward-looking, wide-open, and aspirational. Yes, local elections—and certainly the 2026 midterms—are important, and maybe even promising for the party. But not as important as picking a new national leader, something the Democrats have not really done since Barack Obama was first elected in 2008. Among the many tragedies of Biden's last act was that he delayed his party, indefinitely, from anointing its next generation. Trump himself might not be on the ballot in 2028, but he's still giving his opposition plenty to run against. So Democrats might as well take the show national and start now, if for no other reason than to escape from fractures of the present and circular nightmares of the recent past. Which began, more or less, on June 27 of last year. When Democrats stop dwelling on that disaster and what followed, that might signal that they're finally getting somewhere.
Newsweek
27 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Donald Trump Approval Rating Falls To All-Time Low
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Donald Trump's approval rating has dropped to an all-time low, according to Newsweek's latest poll tracker. The tracker shows that 43 percent of Americans currently approve of Trump's performance, while 53 percent disapprove—giving him a net approval rating of -10 points. That marks a three-point decline from the previous day, when his net approval stood at -7. It also matches his lowest net rating since April 29, when he last hit -10—which was, at the time, his lowest on record. Why It Matters Trump's poll numbers initially plunged after he announced his "Liberation Day" tariffs back in April. Although his approval ratings recovered somewhat soon after, his recent actions appear to have reignited public frustration with the White House. This includes his decision to deploy the National Guard and Marines to Los Angeles to suppress anti-ICE protests, as well as ordering air strikes on three nuclear facilities in Iran last weekend—strikes that polls show most voters oppose. In response, Iran retaliated by launching missiles at a U.S. military base in Qatar on Monday. Since then, surveys have shown Trump's popularity has fallen to its lowest point on record. President Donald Trump listens during a briefing with the media, Friday, June 27, 2025, at the White House in Washington. President Donald Trump listens during a briefing with the media, Friday, June 27, 2025, at the White House in Washington. Jacquelyn Martin/AP What To Know Several polls show that Trump's approval rating has fallen to new lows for his second term. The latest YouGov/Economist poll, conducted between June 20-23 among 1,590 adults, shows Trump with a net approval rating of -14 points, with 40 percent approving and 54 percent disapproving—down slightly from -13 last week. The poll had a margin of error of ± 3.5 percent. Similarly, a new Bullfinch Group poll, conducted between June 17-20 among 1,223 adults, puts his net approval at -13 points, with 41 percent approval and 54 percent disapproval. That marks a sharp drop from -5 in May. The poll's margin of error was ± 3.1 percent. The latest Ipsos/Reuters, and American Research Group polls also show Trump's net approval rating at record lows for his second term. In the Ipsos/Reuters poll, conducted between June 21-23 among 1,139 registered voters, Trump's net approval rating stood at -16 points, with 41 percent approving and 57 percent disapproving. That is down from a previous low of -12 points in last week's poll. The poll has a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points. In the latest American Research Group poll, conducted June 17-20 among 1,100 adults, Trump's net approval rating hit -21 points, with 38 percent approving and 59 percent disapproving, down from a low of -14 points in the previous poll conducted in May. The latest Morning Consult poll, conducted between June 20-22 among 2,205 registered voters, did not show Trump's approval rating at an all-time low. But it did show a notable decline, with 45 percent approving and 53 percent disapproving, for a net approval rating of -8 points. That is down from -6 in the previous poll. The margin of error is plus or minus 2 points. Other polls have also shown a downward trend in Trump's approval rating in recent days. That includes the latest Quantus Insights poll, conducted between June 23-25 among 1,000 registered voters, which shows Trump's approval slipping slightly to 47 percent, down from 48 percent. His disapproval rating rose to 50 percent, up from 49 percent in the previous poll. Meanwhile, a Tyson Group poll, conducted between June 25-26 among 1,027 U.S. adults, showed Trump's net approval rating 6 points underwater, with 45 percent approving and 51 percent disapproving. It comes as polling has shown Trump deep underwater on almost every issue. The latest Quinnipiac poll showed that Trump was underwater on at least seven key issues. His lowest marks concerned his handling of deportations, where his net approval rating stood at -20, down from -16 in early June. That was followed closely by trade and the economy, both at -17. On immigration—an issue long central to his political brand—Trump hit a new low in his second term, with a net approval of -16, down from -11 earlier in the month. The survey also showed that 56 percent of voters disapproved of the way Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) did its job, compared to 39 percent who approved. Nearly two-thirds of voters (64 percent), when given two choices, said they preferred giving most undocumented immigrants in the United States a pathway to legal status, while 31 percent said they preferred deporting most undocumented immigrants. He also received negative ratings on foreign policy (-14), military affairs (-4), and his handling of the Israel-Iran conflict (-14), highlighting broad concerns over his approach to international crises. The latest Emerson poll showed similar results. When asked whether Trump's economic policies are making the economy better or worse, 46 percent of respondents said his policies are making things worse, compared to just 28 percent who said they are making the economy better. Another 26 percent said they believe it's too soon to tell or that his actions have had no effect. The poll also found that nearly half of voters disapprove of Trump's overall handling of the U.S. economy. Forty-eight percent said they disapprove of the way he is managing economic issues, while only 37 percent approve. On immigration—historically one of Trump's signature issues—the public remains deeply divided. The survey shows that 48 percent approve of his approach to immigration policy and undocumented immigrants, while 40 percent disapprove. Just under 12 percent said they have no opinion. Foreign policy appears to be another area of concern for voters. On key international conflicts, Trump's ratings skew negative. Regarding the war between Russia and Ukraine, 45 percent of respondents disapprove of his handling, while 41 percent approve. On the war between Israel and Hamas, 41 percent disapprove and 38 percent approve. Meanwhile, the Tyson Group poll showed more positive results for the president, who is 4 points above the water on immigration, with 48 percent approving and 44 percent disapproving. On foreign policy, voters were evenly split, with 45 percent approving and the same amount disapproving. But on the issue of inflation, Trump is still deep underwater by 16 points, with 37 percent approving and 53 percent disapproving. Poll Date Approve Disapprove The Tyson Group June 25-26 45 51 Emerson College June 24-25 45 46 Quantus Insights June 23-25 47 50 American Pulse June 23-25 50 49 Quinnipiac June 22-24 41 54 YouGov/Economist June 20-23 40 54 Ipsos/Reuters June 21-23 41 57 Morning Consult June20-22 45 53 Bullfinch Group June 17-20 41 54 American Research Group June 17-20 38 59 Still, a handful of polls recorded slight gains for Trump, though largely within the margin of error. Quinnipiac's latest poll, conducted between June 22-24 among 979 self-identified registered voters, shows Trump's approval rating at 41 percent, a 3-point increase from the previous survey earlier this month. His disapproval rating remains unchanged at 54 percent. The most recent RMG Research poll, conducted between June 11-19, put his approval rating up one at 53 percent, while his disapproval rating remained the same at 46 percent. And in the latest Trafalgar Group poll, conducted between June 18-20, 54 percent approved of Trump's job performance, while 45 percent disapproved, giving him a net approval of +9 points. That is up from +8 in last month's poll, when 54 percent approved and 46 percent disapproved. The latest Emerson College poll, conducted between June 24-25 showed Trump's approval rating largely unchanged from April, with 45 percent approving and 46 percent disapproving, giving him a net approval rating of -1.
The Hill
32 minutes ago
- The Hill
Senate Republicans make last-minute SNAP changes in Trump bill ahead of vote
Senate Republicans' latest version of President Trump's 'big, beautiful bill' includes notable tweaks to the party's proposals to reduce federal spending for Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) in the coming years — after recent pushback from Alaska Republicans. The bill would still require some states to cover a share of the cost of SNAP benefits, which are currently completely funded by the federal government, if they have a payment error rate above 6 percent beginning in fiscal 2028. But the updated text also sharpens the proposal even further when it comes to which year's error rates can be used to help determine the share a state could have to pay under the plan. The plan explicitly allows states to choose between using data from fiscal years 2025 or 2026 to calculate the states' match for fiscal 2028. In fiscal 2029 and beyond, the match will be calculated based on the error rate from three fiscal years before. However, the new bill also includes a 'waiver authority' section that could allow for noncontiguous states, or Alaska and Hawaii, to see the requirements waived if they're found to be 'actively implementing a corrective action plan' and carrying out other activities to reduce their error rate. The update comes as Alaska Republicans have recently raised concerns over the proposal. 'Our big thing is the data to be used, the data to be used on the error rate,' Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska.) told The Hill on Friday ahead of the new bill text's release. 'So, that's important to make sure that the data is as accurate and reflective of the year you're judging as possible.' As part of the proposed SNAP plan, states with higher payment error rates cover a greater share of benefit costs. If the error rate is 6 percent or higher, states would be subject to a sliding scale that could see their share of allotments rise to a range of between 5 percent to 15 percent. Numbers from the Agriculture Department showed Alaska's payment error rate — which factors in overpayment and underpayment error rates — reached above 60 percent in fiscal year 2023. The national average hit 11.68 percent. Sullivan said his state has seen much lower payment error rates prior to the pandemic and is on track to improve those figures, noting new numbers are expected soon. But he added, 'It's still higher than our traditional error rate, and as you know, the cost share is based in part on that.' Asked briefly about the party's SNAP proposals, Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) told The Hill on Friday, 'We're still in trouble on SNAP.' 'The implementation is still next to impossible for us,' she said. Republicans say the proposal is aimed at incentivizing states to get their payment error rates down, while Democrats have argued the measure could lead to states having to cut benefits. The Senate proposal also seeks to narrow exceptions for work requirements for nondisabled adults and calls for upping the age that nondisabled adults to 'continue working through 64,' a committee breakdown of the bill details. But in a change from the initial text unveiled by the Senate Agriculture Committee weeks back, the bill also includes a exemption for parents or guardians of children under the age of 14, and carveouts for those who are are 'Indians, Urban Indians, California Indians, and other Indians who are eligible for the Indian Health Services,' the committee said. The bill still does not include language preserving exemptions for veterans, homeless individuals and youth that were in foster care previously greenlit by Congress as part of a bipartisan deal in 2023. But the committee also told The Hill earlier this month that its plan would still not require 'individuals who are physically or mentally unfit for employment … to meet the 20 hours per week work requirement whether in those groups or not.' Other proposals in the SNAP plan also seek to limit the federal government's ability to increase monthly benefits in the future and include a chunk of farm provisions that GOP leaders have argued will make it easier to craft a bipartisan farm bill in the months ahead — although Democrats have said otherwise.
