Both Trump and his “border czar,” Tom Homan, have said California officials could face arrest if they’re perceived as impeding ICE operations.
California Gov. Gavin Newsom pushed back against threats of arrest by Trump administration officials, remaining defiant as he oversees clashes between law enforcement agents and protesters in response to immigration raids across Los Angeles while also managing an ongoing power struggle with the federal government.
In an interview for MSNBC with NBC News’ Jacob Soboroff, Newsom called Homan’s bluff, urging him to “just get it over with” and move ahead with the arrest.
“He’s a tough guy. Why doesn’t he do that? He knows where to find me,” Newsom said. “That kind of bloviating is exhausting. So, Tom, arrest me. Let’s go."
I mean this is exactly what i would call resisting, but i agree he is a shithead.
I can understand people being pissed at him since every Californian cop has been taking the national guard’s side against the protesters so far
The national guard is under his command. The President needs his permission to be mobilized federally, with certain exceptions that require them to be used against an external enemy.
He should have gone to the NG and ordered them to stand down. Because their current orders were doubley illegal.
dude the californian cops have been far worse than the national guard. i’m not really sure what you’re talking about with this side thing. watch the videos man, the cops are the ones being super aggressive. national guard is just kinda standing back most of the time.
Yeah, I guess I was thinking of this from the top down constitutional perspective of it (and even then I probably should have said taking ICE’s side or the federal government’s side), but meanwhile on the ground the LAPD is doing the LAPD thing and the National Guard is doing the National Guard thing
A lot of people here are unable to accept that shitty people they hate can sometimes be right.
This is just two shitty showboats both benefiting.
How is it resisting to say “arrest me”?
Because it signals noncompliance, fucking obviously. And it is consistent with the lawsuit he’s filing, so it’s not just empty words.
JFC.
Signaling non-compliance? There is a vast gap between actually resisting and signaling. Signaling is not resisting. It’s free speech, constitutionally protected, significant case law behind it, and not actually resisting.
“I’m not going to do what you want so you will have to come down here and drag me away”
Damn, Rosa Parks really should have tried resisting instead of just sitting in the front of the bus and refusing to move until she was dragged out by cops.
How do you not see that it is resistance? What a bizarre question
It’s called free speech. It’s quite simple the difference between free speech and resistance. Resistance in this context would be actually fighting physically to get away from a lawfully parameterized arrest. Even when under arrest, if someone were to say I’m not going with you, that is not resisting. By saying come arrest me that is not resistance. That is simply a taunt or a command or a suggestion or a joke or sarcasm or any other method of constitutionally protected free speech, not in the least bit resistance.
Are you responding to the comment about Rosa Parks? Because if so then I have responded to the wrong thing
Because dude hasn’t done shit except disingenuously offer to sit in a cell.
It’s not. It’s just more political theater. These two creeps were made for each other.
Even if dude is arrested, it’ll just be a brief show for the cameras
If this is “resisting” then we’re doomed.