- The fact that people are mentioned in the files does not mean that they had sex with underage girls or that they knew what Epstein was doing.
- The Biden administration had ample opportunity to report what they saw in the files.
time to de escalate in mn
- Thread starter baltimorened
- Start date
Receipts, b!tch
“In that case, since magas won't hold insurrectionists accountable for the crimes they committed against cops, I think we'll start shooting them ourselves and it's all the fault of the scumbag Magat party”
Joking or not, you can’t go around spewing this sh!tt on message boards. Show me one post where any poster “jokingly” talked about running around shooting innocent leftist
No they didn't the investigation was ongoing. The state refrains from releasing information on ongoing investigations all the time. So as not to effect teh investigation. You can dispell this with a simple google search
bdgan: I recall reading that Illegal alien detainer notices (I think that is what they are called) have regularly been issued (or perhaps it is complied with, as I am not sure who issues the notices, ICE, DHS, or the local municipality) by the Minnesota authorities. Instead, what I see being posted repeatedly by MAGA types is that Minneapolis (and perhaps St. Paul as well) have adopted ordinances making it/them a Sanctuary City. I suppose it is possible that both are true, and that it is state officials who are working with ICE and/or DHS. Were you aware of this?)
OK, I believe this might be your answer>
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), specifically through its Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) division, issues detainer notices (Form I-247A) to federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies. These notices request that local jails hold individuals for up to 48 hours beyond their scheduled release.
Yeah, my cursory reading is that Sanctuary Cities aren't breaking any laws. Any thoughts, Ned?
Chat GPT Prompt
well, I would think...think that is, that if naming yourself as a sanctuary city was against the law, Trump would have sued by now. here's what AI says:
Becoming a sanctuary city is not considered illegal under federal law, as the Constitution allows states and localities to limit their voluntary assistance with federal immigration enforcement. While some federal officials and critics argue these policies violate federal law and 8 U.S.C. §1373, courts have often upheld the legality of restricting local resources from being used for immigration, which is a federal responsibility.
Ned: You answered the question on who issues the Detainer Notices and what they request. But you did not provide an answer to the issue of whether Minnesota is complying with such Detainer Notices, so I consulted my friend Google. The answer that popped up suggested that - surprise! - it is a bit of a mixed bag.
It appears that the Minnesota Attorney General issued an opinion stating ithat "local law enforcement cannot legally hold someone beyond their scheduled release time based on an immigration ddtainer." Conversely, it appears that "As of Jan. 2026, the Minnesota Department of Corrections (DOC) reported that it complies with ICE requests to notify them when a non-citizen is in custody," The various Minnesota counties are a jumble of compliance and sanctuary policy. Here is the verbiage that Google provided:
Compliance with ICE detainer notices in Minnesota is inconsistent, creating a patchwork approach where some counties comply while others restrict cooperation. A Feb. 2025 legal opinion from the Minnesota Attorney General's Office concluded local law enforcement cannot hold individuals solely on immigration detainers if they are otherwise eligible for release, as noted in this article.
Key aspects of Minnesota's ICE cooperation:
It appears that the Minnesota Attorney General issued an opinion stating ithat "local law enforcement cannot legally hold someone beyond their scheduled release time based on an immigration ddtainer." Conversely, it appears that "As of Jan. 2026, the Minnesota Department of Corrections (DOC) reported that it complies with ICE requests to notify them when a non-citizen is in custody," The various Minnesota counties are a jumble of compliance and sanctuary policy. Here is the verbiage that Google provided:
Compliance with ICE detainer notices in Minnesota is inconsistent, creating a patchwork approach where some counties comply while others restrict cooperation. A Feb. 2025 legal opinion from the Minnesota Attorney General's Office concluded local law enforcement cannot hold individuals solely on immigration detainers if they are otherwise eligible for release, as noted in this article.
Key aspects of Minnesota's ICE cooperation:
- State Policy: As of 2025, Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison issued a legal opinion stating that local law enforcement cannot legally hold someone beyond their scheduled release time based on an immigration detainer.
- County Disparities: While some jurisdictions have moved away from holding inmates for ICE, others continue to cooperate. For instance, in 2021, Hennepin County Sheriff's Office ceased honoring most ICE detainer requests and notifying them of release dates, according to the Immigrant Law Center of Minnesota.
- Cooperation Efforts: Despite restrictions in some areas, some counties, such as Dakota, continue to communicate with ICE regarding inmate information and facilitate transfers when legally permitted, as discussed in this YouTube video.
- Detention Facilities: ICE continues to operate in Minnesota, with jails in Freeborn, Kandiyohi, and Sherburne counties having long-standing agreements to house detainees, noted in this YouTube video.
- DOC Compliance: As of Jan. 2026, the Minnesota Department of Corrections (DOC) reported that it complies with ICE requests to notify them when a non-citizen is in custody, as stated in this YouTube video.
Last edited:
So I guess my only take away from this is that we're not in a "selective enforcement of the law" space (though I have admitted that I'm fine with selective enforcement and won't pretend I didn't previously say that). I think the modal position of "the left" is that it's "fine" to deport grandmas but we don't think that's a particularly good use of resources and, more importantly, we don't agree with the manner in which it's being executed.
Please note I'm not saying that you are arguing the point about enforcement manner at all, I'm only trying to clarify what I think the left's position mostly is AND that it doesn't seem laws have to be broken or ignored to achieve that position.
Epstein was put in jail in 2019. Maxwell was found guilty in 2021. She kept appealing but her final appeal was dismissed on October 6, 2025. The Biden DOJ had 3 1/2 months after that to release documents (including a month before the election).
right and Trump has had 1 year and 7 days and also a Congressional law that was passed, that they are now in obstruction of. Deflect how ever much you want, this is nonsense non partisan issue.
Well, we can quibble on deporting Grandma's...agree, that targeting one for deportation, unless (gand)ma barker or the like is not good use of resources. On the other hand, if we follow the law to the letter, if she's in the country illegally and hiding her illegal, criminal grandson, different story.
We shouldn't be violating laws. I think that the right's position - in the country illegally you get deported. But, the other side is equally valid, Law Enforcement need to follow the laws impacting their actions.
so how do we deal with the part of the congressional law that requires protection of the victims in the release?
the suggestion was made to put an independent observer with security clearance, to over see this process. the DOJ rejected Congress' request to do this.
How else, do we know, that the DOJ isn't dragging their feet on this process? How? Without oversight?
well for sure we don't know if DoJ is dragging their feet or if they're going B--ls to the wall. Reports has said that DoJ has 500 lawyers working on the documents...to the point that there are complaints from some defendants in NY that trials are being delayed because the federal lawyers are engaged in the Epstein reviews. There are also - it is reported - that lawyers for some of the victims have complained that in the first tranches of files released their clients were not adequately protected. Now, I don't know who to believe anymore. Seems as if for every report there is an equal and opposite report...
But I would agree that DoJ doesn't need to wait until the last document is reviewed before releasing others. It would seem that they've had enough time with the files to release another 100,000 or so. They can't be that slow of readers...but they are lawyers
I don't know how an observer, observes the work of 500 lawyers
I thought you served in a bureaucracy. You seriously don't know how someone would measure the work of 500 people? Seems pretty straightforward to me.
NOT the same streets
"Replies and reports clarify the event occurred in conservative suburb Maple Grove, not Minneapolis proper, where local police and a different mayor enabled quicker action compared to urban sanctuary policies.
Ok - this is too far. Dude should be fired. He should know better after everything going on.
you know, trying to push an agenda - and this relates to both right and left disciples - where one side wins and the other loses is not, in my opinion, helpful in bringing us together as a nation. In the normal world "negotiators" attempt to come to win-win agreements as opposed to win-lose ones.
I don't know any terms of an agreement between Homan and Walz/frey, but anything that calms the protesters and allows ICE to continue to do it's job without interference and unnecessary force, seems like a win-win to me..
Let's see, Bovino has been sent out to pasture and there's new reporting that ICE can no longer arrest non-criminals but sure man, Walz got bent.
While Minnesota law does compel the state’s Department of Corrections to notify ICE when an immigrant convicted of a felony is slated for release, not every detention center in the state is operated by the department. The Hennepin County Public Safety Facility in Minneapolis, the state’s largest jail, operates under the jurisdiction of the Hennepin County Sheriff’s Office. Under Sheriff Dawanna Witt, the jail’s policy is to refuse to work with ICE, according to the New York Times.
it's amazing to me that state/local governments would not want to turn over criminals in the country illegally to get them out of their states/cities.
Can someone who supports these policies provide the thought process behind just releasing those folks back in to their communities?
I think the thought is that if they served their jail time they should be allowed to go free. I also assume they think locals should handle this, not the feds. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong.
Mamdani & Hochul both support free childcare for illegals in NYC. That doesn't make sense to me either. NYC already has a $2b deficit for 2026 and is project that to increase to $10b.
A lot of people think nobody is illegal and that illegals should be supported with taxpayer dollars. We've come a long way from the public charge doctrine.
No deflection. The investigations into Epstein have been going on for many years. Your contention is
- Dems could release anything until after all of Maxwell's appeals elapsed.
- Dems had no interest in using information against Trump either 1 month before or 3 months after the election.
- 4 months wasn't enough time for the Biden DOJ but 12 months has been plenty of time for Trump.
- Conclusion: Trump is obviously a pedophile or pedophile enabler.
I'm sure the Dems didn't think the juice was worth the squeeze- alot of their own and donors would be implicated and wasn't worth it even to go after Trump.
But it was NEVER a part of the platform they ran on. They didn't highlight the files, didn't obsess over them, or rally their ENTIRE base behind releasing them, and then completely just do a 180 on the entire thing.
This isn't hard, that's simply incredibly suspicious and duplicitous by the Trump Administration
It's not amazing to me. At all. And I applaud that refusal. It pairs well with the refusal of ICE and DHS to work with state and local law enforcement in Minnesota (e.g., excluding state and local law enforcement from crime sites in their own friggin' state. not sharing investigatory information with state and local law enforcement, actually harassing members of state and local law enforcement, etc.)
I don't recall, although I might have missed some posts, but both Democrats and republicans are actively calling for release of Epstein files, and they will be released. Where the debate comes is that you want the files out now and others like me say, 500 lawyers yada yada.
I'd personally like to see the files that have been completed, and there must be some, released ASAP. There is a law, and everybody should follow the law.
I'd wager you should ask my opinion rather than form it for me. That way you won't put effort in the wrong place.
The DOJ has a law to abide by. They will be held in contempt if they don't do it. Do you actually believe the statement that they are redacting victims and thats taking a long time? How do you weigh that with Trump's name being redacted from the files? Is he a victim?
I work in data, and scrubbing names from a file would be as easy as : Give me me the names. I run a script, tahda its done. Now its up to some lawyers to review and approve I assume. If they have 500 folks reviewing this it should be easy. Also, if they weren't dragging their feet, then why cannot they come out and say what their progress is, and their velocity and thus an estimated completion date.
Something smells wrong. On all fronts.
doesn't that assume though that the files are part of the data base? Like I said I'd like to see the files released if for no other reason than to get this issue behind us. We have enough other things going on
It's possible that dems thought some of their own would be implicated. Reps might be thinking the same thing about their side.
That said it seems highly unlikely that the dem DOJ had the goods on Trump but decided not to shift the focus of their campaign.
They are, the dems are only talking about them NOW though- it essentially started as a conspiracy theory that Trump promised all of MAGA for years that as soon as he got to office, he would release them immediately. The dem's never talked about them UNTIL Trump was elected and he buried them in an incredibly suspicious manner.