News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
Ok where in that news article is there anything about democrats supporting ICE? and how is it possible that no matter how bad the stuff the Republicans do, it's the democrats fault?
This is the story that fox news continues to force feed. We are at the “if I did, it was your fault” stage of abuse.
Why did the democrats let this happen 😞
They're opposing the people opposing ICE. They're supposed to be the opposition party, but all they ever seem to oppose seriously is the left.
Can you show me where they're opposing the people opposing ICE? Thus far, Newsom has been strongly critical of the crackdown, and the LA Mayor has only enforced a curfew in a single area of downtown where there was legitimate looting by opportunists - other protest sites are untouched by that policy.
Please, explain.
So, per your own comment, protests in that area are being suppressed by California law enforcement who are claiming "looting" as an excuse
Also, per that recent incident where an LAPD officer said from a helicopter that they were taking pictures and would arrest protesters at their homes, it doesn't seem like they're going to limit their suppression activities to that one area
??? The mayor of LA, who has so far been against state escalation against the protests, indicated a small section of down town LA was under curfew because of opportunists looting. She was explicit that other protest sites were not being interfered with by LAPD.
I don't see why we wouldn't believe her in this case given her history and the context.
Re: helicopter thing, yes that comment was apparently made but hit me up when something happens. Very easy to make yourself upset when you get to invent scenarios to be mad about.
Oh, is the curfew not city wide?
No, it isn't, a section of downtown only where opportunists were looting.
Whoever downvoted this, heres proof: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2025/jun/11/la-protests-los-angeles-curfew-ice-california-governor-donald-trump-us-politics-latest-updates-news
Literally in the byline: Mayor Karen Bass issues curfew for one square mile area in downtown, beginning at 8pm local time on Tuesday until 6am local time on Wednesday
These things are not hard to find!
75 Democrats Express 'Gratitude' to ICE in Antisemitism Vote Amid LA Riots
https://www.newsweek.com/75-democrats-house-antisemitism-resolution-ice-gratitude-2083177
Because this is typical Republican behavior which surprises no one much like how there are different rules for how children act versus adults. Democrats are supposed to be the opposition party but with their actions, they regularly condone and enable the worst aspects of Republican behavior even if their empty rhetoric says otherwise.
You can keep quoting the same Newsweek article at me, it doesn't become truer the more its linked.
What'd I miss?
I didnt have to scroll very far
https://www.newsweek.com/75-democrats-house-antisemitism-resolution-ice-gratitude-2083177
You shouldn't trust NewsWeek, it's considered unreliable. That house resolution they're discussing is about the Boulder CO terror attack, nothing to do with LA situation.
That the House of Representatives—
(1)
condemns Mohammed Sabry Soliman and his antisemitic terrorist attack on peaceful demonstrators supporting the release of the hostages held by Hamas;
(2)
affirms that free and open communication between State and local law enforcement and their Federal counterparts remains the bedrock of public safety and is necessary in preventing terrorist attacks; and
(3)
expresses gratitude to law enforcement officers, including U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement personnel, for protecting the homeland.
Is the "homeland" for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement restricted to Colorado only? I'm at a loss for how you can claim this is only about a specific incident in Colorado. This resolution states that state and local law enforcement sharing information with ICE is "the bedrock for public safety" and 75 House Dems agreed with that.
/sigh
Objectively true and aligns with Newsom and other's critiques of why the LA situation is bad in the first place
You can't just cherry pick shit you dislike - this statement was part of a compound resolution EXCLUSIVELY about the Boulder terrorist attack, in which DHS and ICE were positive forces. That's what all the "whereas" means, it means "in the context of"... stop intentionally misinterpreting things to be mad about it.
Objectively false as demonstrated by all the unreported crimes against marginalized individuals in places where state and local law enforcement report detainees to ICE. Would you report a rape or assault against you if you knew police would lock you up and send you to a gulag in El Salvador because you don't have the proper paperwork? Would you come forward as a witness to a crime under the same circumstances? Most people don't which is the entire reason why "sanctuary cities" exist.
What exactly did I cherry pick here? I quoted you directly with zero edits.
The "whereas" is just outlining what happened and giving a pretext for this dystopian purity test. The resolution is absolutely not exclusively about what happened in Boulder as it references federal authorities and the nation as a whole. In what way are DHS and ICE retroactively "positive forces" in an attack that had already occurred with a suspect that is already in custody? This is nonsense.