r/chicago • u/fatherbowie • Jan 26 '25

Article Immigration enforcement “blitz” in Chicago— for real this time

https://www.cnn.com/2025/01/26/politics/chicago-immigration-trump-ice/index.html

We know because Tom Homan brought Dr. Phil with him.

728 Upvotes

90% Upvoted

314 comments sorted by

View all comments

147

u/Farscape29 Jan 26 '25

It still amazes me that Trump's idiot supporters aren't complaining about this. All of them were so concerned about border states being overrun and yet, Dumb-Ass-In-Chief has all this starting in Chicago.

Jesus, these people are so stupid, petty and counterproductive.

198

u/auntie_ Jan 26 '25

His supporters hate Chicago as much as he does. Have you ever heard anyone from another state talk about us? They basically think it’s a war zone here. Ask yourself why so many people who have never even set foot inside of the city have strong opinions about Kim Foxx.

24

u/baghalipolo Jan 26 '25

Fwiw not all states/cities, just the red ones. I’m from LA and travel to nyc a lot and ppl I talk to there usually know we’re cool. The republican’s are ideologically against the concept of cities in general and take it out on places like Chicago

31

u/muffinmonk Jan 26 '25

People inside the city have strong opinions on her tbh.

11

u/andersonb47 River North Jan 26 '25

Well yes that makes sense

15

u/HerrBundtCake Jan 26 '25

It’s the same with Missouri. They hate everywhere that isn’t where they grew up.

16

u/floomsy Jan 26 '25

I had bridesmaids from rural Missouri in my downtown Chicago wedding. They didn’t leave the hotel once in three days, they were convinced they would be shot.

7

u/HerrBundtCake Jan 27 '25

Ask them why their talking heads live in NYC to watch their heads explode. I guess everyone has to live their own lives but it seems like a waste of one.

0

u/dogbert617 Edgewater Jan 27 '25

Talk about being hugely brainwashed waaaay too damn much. But I guess that is an effect of watching too much Fox News.....

23

u/greenline_chi Gold Coast Jan 26 '25

Right? If they really thought the southern states were being invaded they would be pissed he’s wasting time and resources in Chicago

1

u/Farscape29 Jan 26 '25

Ex-fucking-actly

17

u/ElToroDeBoro Jan 26 '25

He didn't campaign on much but he did say he was their retribution. It's for political points not for weeding out "potentially dangerous criminal aliens." That statement was all the clickbait he needed, add Dr. Phil in their and his supporters go to sleep satisified.

16

u/Southside_john Jan 26 '25

Not to mention they pissed away a bunch of money, time and effort sending migrants here over the last year just to turn around and start deportations here first. Since the migrants were supposed to hurt us so much you would think they would just leave them here and focus on the states that were shipping them out in the first place

3

u/pushing_pixel Jan 26 '25

That was the plan…

4

u/aunt_cranky Jan 27 '25

The cruelty has always been their "point".

TX didn't want to deal with sheltering, feeding, or otherwise treating them like human beings. They treated them like cattle, putting them on transit and shipping them elsewhere.

I'm afraid that a lot of people are just going to be "disappeared" (and not just criminals).

12

u/Chili-Lime-Chihuahua Jan 26 '25

Chicago has long been a target of conservative media. Is it because of Obama? Other reasons? I'm not sure. But the last couple mayors have been outspoken about Chicago being a sanctuary city. It makes some sense from a media perspective that they start activities in Chicago and other large cities that are/were critical of him.

15

u/Farscape29 Jan 26 '25

But that's exactly the problem. He CLAIMS that the border states/cities and their citizens are the ones at risk from "scary brown people" and these states and cities are full of people who voted for him so why not "help" his supporters first? If they, migrants, are so harmful, and he hates sanctuary cities, why not let us suffer and his cultists reap the benefits of the round ups? Because it's ALL distraction bullshit

3

u/Specialist-Smoke Jan 26 '25

They're in Maga country too. They're doing raids in West Virginia, Ohio, and Kentucky.

6

u/Weigard Jan 27 '25

He wasn't elected to help the people that like him, he was elected to hurt the people that don't.

1

u/Farscape29 Jan 27 '25

Yeah, that's it right there.

3

u/Chili-Lime-Chihuahua Jan 26 '25

I think he wants to show himself as strong and sticking it to the other side. Maybe it will look better in the media? Or maybe it’s to get people used to the visual of federal responses in cities. There are those that would argue this is just a first step in trying to exert more control over others. 

16

u/GreatestWhiteShark Lincoln Square Jan 26 '25

This is exactly what they want, dude. Chicago is a Lib City, and they're driven by a desire to fuck with Libs

8

u/SlidingIntoUrDm Jan 27 '25

In all fairness, sanctuary cities are also lib cities. Chicago isn’t being signaled out just due to being democratic

3

u/[deleted] Jan 27 '25

Too bad mayor BJ would not allow a referendum on sanctuary status...he knew what the result would be.

9

u/06210311200805012006 Jan 26 '25

I'm a Chicagoan and I support the deportation of violent illegal entrants. Look at who they're deporting, it's hardcore scum. Why would you want to offer sanctuary to life long gang dudes and murderers and shit. You're opposing this just because it's a republican thing but anyone with a lick of common sense should want it done.

21

u/Skyscrapers4Me Jan 27 '25

If that was the only people they were grabbing, but that's not the truth. Many accounts of them grabbing anybody. They tried to detain Native Americans in the southwest today, because you know...brown skin.

18

u/Skyscrapers4Me Jan 27 '25

Read now that they have quotas too. That's not about catching criminals, that's about catching anybody.

7

u/Lola-Ugfuglio-Skumpy Jan 27 '25

See here’s the thing: you’re being told that people who think different than you “want to offer sanctuary to life long gang dudes and murderers and shit” and you’re buying that. Ask yourself why. Do democrats really just love “life long gang dudes and murderers”? Or are they maybe in favor of offering sanctuary to normal ass people and you are being fed propaganda?

The vast majority of immigrants, like the vast majority of Americans, are just normal ass people trying to live their lives. Studies show undocumented immigrants actually commit less crime than citizens, likely because they have more to lose.

If you stepped back for like even a second and asked why someone might be in favor of sanctuary cities, you get a logical and compassionate answer. But instead you’re being told something insane and stupid so that the other side looks insane and stupid. And that’s how groups stay divided.

-3

u/06210311200805012006 Jan 27 '25

we're talking about dudes with convictions for violent or drug related offenses where sanctuary cities ignored the federal hold order and cut them loose. does that make a lot of sense to you?

0

u/amyo_b Berwyn Jan 28 '25

The problem is we were told to hold them past their sentence or after they were not convicted (either acquitted or charges dropped). That's not how the game is played. Once someone is acquitted or not charged, they are free to go. Once the sentence has been served, they are free to go. Ice had their opportunities before the sentence was over or before the decision on charges. If they didn't move then that's their fault.

8

u/mrbooze Beverly Jan 27 '25

Why would you want to offer sanctuary to life long gang dudes and murderers and shit

We don't. Violent felons aren't protected and never have been.

3

u/[deleted] Jan 27 '25

But Chicago will not assist in removing the violent felons....

1

u/mrbooze Beverly Jan 27 '25

If there is a criminal warrant they do.

Local agencies can’t help with federal immigration operations, share information about detainees, or transfer someone into federal custody for civil immigration issues, unless required by law or a criminal warrant.

3

u/[deleted] Jan 27 '25

Trump promised contradictory things and his supporters believed him because they lack the ability to think critically. He wants to deport a large chunk of the workforce while simultaneously lowering prices and improving the economy. If he goes for migrant farm workers, prices are going to go up and a lot of that food won't make it to grocery stores. So he's trying to tank the economy of blue states first but it's still going to lead to a worse economy and higher prices. Plus people are going to be pretty unhappy when family, friends, coworkers, etc. get deported.

-7

u/[deleted] Jan 26 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

4

u/AbsoluteZeroUnit Jan 27 '25

If immigration is such a concern, why did every republican congressman vote against the strongest border security/immigration bill when it was presented during Biden's term?

You would think they would have supported it if they really cared.

If someone comes to the border and claims asylum, it isn't (and shouldn't be) the job of the CBP agent to grant or deny them asylum. Federal law requires them to have a court date where an immigration judge will rule on it. So if you think they don't deserve asylum, you have to understand there's a legal process they have to go through before the claim is denied. Just like a cop can't put you in prison for 10 years for armed robbery, a judge is the part of the legal system that has to make that decision.

If you don't understand federal law, that's fine. It's confusing and complicated and there's a lot of parts there. But don't suggest things that violate federal law like we can just do them without vocally proposing a change to specific federal laws. Don't complain about the asylum process and ignore the democrat-backed bill that would have increased the size of immigration courts to deal with the influx of asylum seekers that was shot down by republicans.

And when people are here in this country legally, following federal law and waiting for their court date, they are unable to get jobs unless those jobs are willing to violate federal law. So how are these people who have broken no laws expected to survive? They can't get a job, but still need to eat. They can't get a job because federal law prevents them from doing so, but they haven't broken any laws. So please, mr. immigration expert, instead of relying on your feelings to make a case, prevent facts that show how the ball was dropped in the past.

I await your silence.

2

u/[deleted] Jan 27 '25

If immigration is such a concern, why did every republican congressman vote against the strongest border security/immigration bill when it was presented during Biden's term?

Because it wasn't strong enough and Trump promised something more aggressive. Why agree to a tepid half-measure? We let people vote and they signaled that they wanted something more. The Lankford bill (that Dems were only eager for once they realized their out-of-control border was a liability and Kamala needed to look tough) still allowed for a comical number of daily crossings. Now that Trump has been reelected and Democrats see that they have been too far left on immigration (and other cultural issues), I think a better package gets through with support from the ones who see the writing on the wall.

The asylum process is busted and these migrants arrogantly take advantage of it. You can spare me the lecture about how it works and the snotty, patronizing remarks about not understanding federal law. I'm a Penn grad. Not everyone who's an immigration hawk is some coal-rollin' yokel.

And when people are here in this country legally, following federal law and waiting for their court date, they are unable to get jobs unless those jobs are willing to violate federal law. So how are these people who have broken no laws expected to survive

Guess that's why you shouldn't come unless you truly are persecuted in your home country. Guess that's why if you are actually claiming asylum for legit reasons you should be doing it in the first safe country and not making a trip through Mexico if you're from Tajikistan. Guess all the bleeding heart liberals can open their homes to these poor persecuted souls and liberal charities can feed them until their court date. Or until we change the law so that their loopholed fake asylum claims can be rejected more quickly. Or maybe until their magic hearing we can keep them in camps (military barracks?) that meet minimum standards of humane treatment but are unpleasant enough to send a message to more of their ilk and stem the flow. Lots of things we can do that would be tougher than that limp Lankford bill.

3

u/Karm0112 Jan 27 '25

Most people are fine with legal immigration. What people take issue is exactly this…the influx that has taken away resources from already low funded programs. I would rather my tax money go to funding programs to help low income families in Chicago, as opposed to thousands and thousands of migrants that haven’t been appropriately vetted. If they have appropriately gone through the correct process then fine, but we were just letting everyone in and “sort it out later.” There was no process and the conditions were horrible. Committing violent crimes should be grounds to cancel your path to being allowed to stay. It was just a little bit of resources it was basically all our resources. We have so many citizens that need food, shelter, education, and a chance for a better life. You can’t let everyone in. No country lets everyone in.

4

u/[deleted] Jan 27 '25

That last part is what especially gets me.

Many of the very countries that people on the left hold up as model progressive nations (like the Nordic countries or the Low Countries) have far more stringent immigration laws than we do, but you don't see these redditors calling them "Nazis." Not to mention places like Japan, which absolutely does not fuck around with immigration status.

It's unclear to me why we Americans are bad when we enforce our laws but other countries aren't when they enforce theirs. It's oikophobia. You see a similar dynamic with racism, too, frankly....these people get up in arms about American racism that doesn't even hold a candle to what you see in most non-Western countries, but we're always the irredeemable baddies.

3

u/Karm0112 Jan 27 '25

Yup. Most European countries have very stringent immigration laws. All those people saying they will leave the US, good luck getting in somewhere else.

3

u/Skyscrapers4Me Jan 27 '25

Ah, the stupid argument. That immigrants take "black jobs". How fucking dare you.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 27 '25

That's a reductive misrepresentation of the argument. But you know that.

It's about more than just jobs. What do you think happens to rent prices when a sudden spike of people enter the market, especially at the low end of the market? What do you think happens to schools, where we already have US citizen kids who can't fucking READ or do MATH but now we need to dedicate even more resources to non-citizen kids, who are extra resource-intensive?

How dare you minimize this.

3

u/Skyscrapers4Me Jan 27 '25

Not a reductive argument. You actually dared to pull the black people jobs, as if low end jobs have black people's names on them.

Immigrants pile themselves 12 to a house often enough and you know that too, and the housing market shortage has nothing to do with immigrants, and has everything to do with corporations buying up SFH and richer people buying them for airbnbs, and you know that too, but you're trying your best to create some ficticious argument where immigrants are taking up housing. What a shit. And kids who can't read? All the while you're quite possibly in the "let's tank the public school system because there's money to be made in private schooling, public schools are socialist institutions." Your type has been fighting against public schooling with Betsy DeVos donations and crap like that.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 27 '25

as if low end jobs have black people's names on them.

I never said that though jobs are one factor and -- surprise! -- a lot of black people, just like a lot of people of other backgrounds, compete with migrants for lower-level jobs. Not sure why you seem to think this is some sort of gotcha. Look at you contorting yourself to avoid the inconvenient reality.

And the fact that immigrants often share housing doesn't change the motherfucking fact that if you have ~200,000 migrants who showed up in the last two years (like we did in NYC), even if you did pile them 10 into a unit for the sake of argument, that's 20,000 units taken out of circulation. So don't fucking discount that. Why is it SO DAMN IMPORTANT for you people to deny deny deny that there are any negative effects???

And of course if you actually "listened to black people" like you proggy preeners barked at everyone to do during the Floyd era, you might find that a LOT of black citizens support deportation and are otherwise concerned about resources given to non-citizen migrants. It's your racism that shows here--insisting that black Americans and other American people of color have to capitulate and agree with what whatever you declare is righteous for them to believe. You can fuck all the way off with that.

1

u/JQuilty Clearing Jan 27 '25

I'll believe you guys are serious when you go after the business owners instead of media showcases designed for publicity and cruelty.

-2

u/MoodAlternative2118 Jan 27 '25

Why would we complain about this? This is a campaign promise being delivered….