Trump Publishes Enemies List To White House Website, And It’s Just Democrats Speaking The Truth
from the 1000-percent-bullshit dept
God, what I wouldn’t give for another Nixon administration. Sure, it was corrupt and built from the ground up to punish the opposing party for being the opposing party. But that administration was limited and restrained by things like competent oversight, a functioning court system that wasn’t constantly undermined by five justices who want to do all of their work on the shadow docket where they’re not obliged to explain their reasoning to the public, and a president who actually knew enough to resign, rather than face impeachment.
What we have now is the perfect storm of capitulation. While having checks and balances that actually function as intended wouldn’t necessarily have prevented Trump from using Whitehouse.gov as his personal blog, it might have encouraged those working for him to do what they could to curb his worst impulses.
None of that remains. And so we get this sort of thing on pretty much a daily basis: a full-page rant from the nation’s sorest winner, declaring anyone who has ever criticized his racist goon squad d/b/a Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Masked ICE agents roam the streets, targeting anyone whose skin doesn’t look white enough, grabs them off the street without identifying themselves or telling people why they’re being kidnapped, and vanishes them into a constantly rotating set of ICE facilities, depriving them of their due process rights, family contact, and, in some cases, basic living necessities like food or bathing facilities.
People are right to criticize ICE for doing what it does in the way that it does it. Immigration enforcement does not need to be handled this way to be efficient. But when the president’s favorite ghoul (Stephen Miller) is demanding 3,000 arrests per day and a nation of bigots continues to cheer Trump on, only the worst, cruelest version of ICE is possible. Understandably, people react to this hideous behavior in the way they should be expected to react. And that’s all it takes to get placed on Trump’s literally official enemies list.
Here’s how the administration leads into its hit list of Democratic politicians (emphasis in the original):
The carnage in Dallas, Texas — where a maniac with “ANTI-ICE” ammo gunned down an ICE field office in an attack clearly targeted at ICE personnel — lays bare the deadly consequences of Democrats’ unhinged crusade against our border enforcement.
Democrats have spent years vilifying ICE as “fascists,” “the Gestapo,” and “slave patrols,” inciting a 1,000% surge in assaults on agents and a wave of Radical Left terror. Their words aren’t just reckless — they’re a battle cry for violence.
Never mind the fact that the gunman managed to kill/injure more immigrants than ICE officers — something that might suggest immigrants were the real target, no matter what investigators claimed to have found scrawled on some unused bullets. And never mind the fact that Trump loves fascism if he gets to be the guy doing it, and would definitely love to have a Gestapo of his own to enforce his will. The concepts embodied by this version of ICE are all of things they’re being described as, which Trump now claims (using a particularly meaningless statistic) will result in violence against… well, encroaching fascism and Gestapo-esque tactics?
If you want to read the full list of official White House enemies, go ahead and click through. But it’s nothing you haven’t seen before, even as recently as last week when the DHS did the same thing because people weren’t being deferential enough to the thuggery that makes up ICE’s daily activities.
And, of course, everyone on the list is a member of the Democratic Party, which means this is also partisan bullshit and, sadly, another indictment of the complete cowardice of the GOP, which also includes supposed “libertarians” like Rand Paul who can’t be bothered to vehemently attack egregious government overreach when it’s Republicans wearing the jackboots.
To read the list is to ask “where’s the lie?” “Modern day Gestapo.” “Secret police.” “Authoritarian.” “Thugs.” “Rogue agency.” “Terrorizing communities.” “Vile and beyond cruel.” “Tearing communities apart.” “Racial profiling.” And so on.
These phrases are enough to get politicians like Tim Walz, Gavin Newsom, Ilhan Omar, Rashida Talib, Hakeem Jeffries, JB Pritzker, and a long list of others added to Trump’s enemies list. No one here did anything wrong. All they ever did was describe what they were seeing, using the best available analogies. ICE and Trump haven’t changed their tactics, which strongly suggests both entities actually believe these terms are compliments, but are at least still socially aware enough to realize that it would be bad to embrace these descriptions publicly.
Trump says the things said by these people are a “battle cry for violence.” If only that were true. So far, the opposition party has generated little more than ineffective bleating and strongly worded letters in response to the very real and present threat of a fascism. And that is doing as close to nothing as is humanly possible while in positions of political power and we all know what doing nothing tends to result in.
Filed Under: dhs, donald trump, elizabeth warren, enemies list, gavin newsom, hakeem jeffries, ice, ilhan omar, jb pritzker, mass deportation, tim walz, trump administration
BestNetTech is off for the holidays! We'll be back soon, and until then don't forget to




Comments on “Trump Publishes Enemies List To White House Website, And It’s Just Democrats Speaking The Truth”
We know it is a lie
Because they would be be pissing in their boots and demanding a violent response to make it go away if the listed had so much as surrounded the congressional building with followers holding signs and chanting demands to do their jobs with a level firm tone of voice.
Well, Trumpism is really just Zombie Nixonism.
Re:
That slanders both mindless zombies and repugnant nixonists in a single sentence.
Re: Re:
So efficient
Re:
You want protection from a zombie attack? Go to a Trump rally, zombies know there’s no nutrition to be gained from the true brainless creatures that gather there.
And members of the president’s own party who were willing to convict him.
Why reopen the government?
Trump started the dumpster fire and continues to pour gasoline on it.
Why should Dems be obligated to put it out?
No capitulation. Let it burn.
Re:
Honestly, the sooner ICE stops getting paid, the better. I’d rather eke it out at this point than have that domestic terror squad funded.
Re: Re:
Payment is a plus for them. They would do it for free. It’s the status that they care about.
Re: Re: Re:
Less the status and more the ability to be openly racist and engage in wanton cruelty without consequences I’d say.
Re:
Because it’s their job. The public are paying the law-makers—all of them—to manage the government properly. That means dumpster fires are to be put out, even if they were started by co-workers with arsonist tendencies. We don’t need two groups of people just standing around and talking trash about the other.
Re: Re:
what a stupid fucking statement to make. One does not attempt to extinguish a fire while still adding fuel, heat and oxygen.
The only way to fix the government is for republicans to stop breaking it as fast as they can, first.
Fuck, I hate you shit bag equivocators.
Re: Re: Re:
Who said anything about that? Presumably, the people trying to put out the fire would not be the ones adding fuel. And, sure, someone would need to do something about the fuel being added, too, but such things can be done in parallel. (Actual firefighters sometimes do fight fires while fuel is coming in; it can take a while to locate and shut down the supply lines.)
I don’t know what you see as “equivocation” here. Do you seriously think it’d be better for the Democrats to stand by and let the country “burn”, because it’s not their problem? They should be working harder than ever, from all reasonable angles—including “re-opening” the government, and fixing it, and starting impeachment proceedings and the like.
Re: Re: Re:2
You are aware that impeachment proceedings start in the House of Representatives, which is currently controlled by the Republicans, yes?
Re: Re: Re:3
Right. So one obvious step would be to start getting Republicans on their side. Or, rather, forget about “Democrats vs. Republicans” or “us vs. Trump”, and just come to some agreement about what’s acceptable or not. Maybe get all those people who claim to support freedom of speech to actually support it.
Re: Re: Re:4
So one obvious step would be to start getting Republicans on their side.
Yeah, no. It’s a waste of time. The voters can sort it out, and at this point, the best Democrat strategy is to force republicans to govern.
That they don’t have enough votes means that THEY can start ASKING for Democrats’ consideration. They seem to think that they’re owed votes without having to earn them.
Re: Re: Re:5
Sure, that’s fine too. Better than being smug while doing nothing, which is what the top-level comment seemed to suggest. The point is, people elected them with the expectation they’d at least try to push back against Trump.
Re: Re: Re:2
To incite violence is to play into the administration’s hands, and this administration sees protests as terrorism and will treat it as such. Leaving only minor civil action. Democrats are already taking them to task in the courts, but the courts are rigged due to packing the bench at the supreme court. The legislative branch is also fixed until the midterms, and the party of pedos directly control the deep state and the executive. Scandal after scandal and its never enough to evaporate the bigotry and racism of the bottom quartile of the population because they lack the capacity to see beyond their own noses, which they regularly cut off to spite their own face (see the soybean situation with farmers).
There is already a growing chorus of people who call for the impeachment of the president, even the speaker of the house doesn’t reject the idea that the president is unfit for office, he simply gives a “both sides” retort. What else do you expect them to do exactly? You expect them to give into the Republican cuts that directly affect both bases, because that would be what it takes to re-open the government. No.
Re: Re: Re:3
Something. Almost anything other than “Let it burn” or violence.
Sorry that’s not “exact”. I don’t have a damn clue what will actually work, because we’ve never had anything like this happen. I just don’t think abdicating the duties for which they were elected is a reasonable option. They all knew, during the election, that they might end up against Trump.
Re: Re: Re:4
They all knew, during the election, that they might end up against Trump.
…and? As a result, they’re supposed to do what republicans don’t have enough votes to accomplish, just because?
You might want to consider that republicans know damn well that they don’t have the votes they need – thinking they don’t need to negotiate for those votes is exactly their fucking problem.
Re: Re: Re:5
This is confusingly worded. Who does each instance of “they” refer to here? It seem to be “Republicans”, but they do have the votes “they need”, at least for some stuff. Did you mean for something else, like a Constitutional amendment? Or did you mean to refer to the Democrats at some point?
Anyway, negotiation is an important thing that needs to be done by everyone involved. Government decisions are not supposed to be trivial battles of party membership counts, basically all decided at election time. Every representative is supposed to be continuously thinking about representing their people, and the principles for which they were elected, not just helping their political party and leader.
Re: Re: Re:2
Man.
Democrats start impeachment?
You’re fucking out to lunch.
Re: Re: Re:
“The only way to fix the government is for republicans to stop breaking it as fast as they can, first.”
“Fuck, I hate you shit bag equivocators.”
Do you not see the irony in your post? You might as well have said ‘The only obvious way to fix the government is to make both political parties be good and fight for the interests of the people’ you fucking dumbass.
Re: Re: Re:2
You need to re-read the definition of equitation and think long and hard.
Re: Re:
Your position is certainly something that we should all be considering, and which the Democrats very clearly have been weighing.
But it’s wrong.
The hostage-taker is the one who is culpable for harm done to a hostage if their demands aren’t met, not the people who refuse to give in to their demands. We should never give an inch to the “look what you made me do” moral logic. I know you’re not saying that the harm done by a shut-down is more on Democrats rather than Republicans, but I think it’s rhetorically important to not even acknowledge that idea, given that they have offered to compromise already but the GOP demands even more.
And aside from the rhetorical strategy, it’s important to not lose this game of chicken in terms of our basic philosophy of government. If the minority party can’t use what little power it has for fear of obstructing the normal operation of the state, then the whole system of check and balances breaks down. We’ve seen the GOP implement a strategy on the other end of that spectrum, refusing to compromise on practically anything during the Obama admin, resulting in shut-downs and of course the blocking of the Garland nomination and many other judicial appointments. That extreme position was harmful too–clearly a balance is needed–but there’s no denying that it was effective for them. They kept the court system on their side and poisoned popular opinion against the Democrats.
If one side always acts ruthlessly while the other never does, then the game is already over. If Democrats fold here, what hope is left? It’s sad that so many people will be harmed by Medicaid cuts, federal employee furloughs, etc., but that harm was baked in from the results of the last election. The only way forward is for America to take its bitter medicine and hopefully learn the lesson that this current iteration of the GOP must be removed in 2026 and 2028.
Re: Re:
Because it’s their job.
Their job isn’t to capitulate – as part of their constituency, I’m fine with leaving it closed. So they’re doing their job just fine.
Not having the votes that YOU need to pass YOUR budget is YOUR problem. That you’re not happy about it is a result of elections having consequences.
Re: Re: Re:
Yes, that’s fair, and I agree with “No capitulation.” But it’s quite a bit different that the suggestion, from the same message, of “Let it burn.” Every elected person has been given the job they applied for: working toward a reasonably functional government. Don’t vote for or against an idea based on which “team” it comes from, but whether it’s good for the people being represented (and for their country).
“Their words aren’t just reckless — they’re a battle cry for violence.”
There’s only two paragraphs of actual text, and they still farm it off to AI to write it?
Re:
I raced to the comments to see if anyone else realized their little spiel was written by GPT
He says this, and makes it official on the official website, for one very specific reason:
Immediate calls to violence are one of the only types of speech not protected by the first amendment. So if he can get people to accept people’s free speech in these terms, he can strip them of their right to say these things, and therefore can punish them for saying these things, chilling any further speech of this type.
That’s the entire game plan.
Re:
That’s part of it I’m sure, but as always with republicans it’s also a massive case of projecting his side’s faults onto those that don’t share them.
Wear it like a badge of honor.
Watergate news coverage… ahh, good times.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
BestNetTech’s Top Minds should be on their way here now to accuse the author of encouraging a civil war.
Re:
Who and what are you talking about??
Re: Re:
It’s the tiresome idiot who demands others to do “something” while never specifying what that is, all to ease his anxiety about what’s happening while he uselessly hide in the basement writing his demented demands.
Re: Re: Re:
The funny thing is, I know the OP of this thread is intentionally targeting me.
The funnier thing is, I bet they’d expect me to whine about something like, say, a video of a right-wing shitheel disrupting a college class with Nazi salutes and bigoted slurs, only to receive a bigger reaction than he expected—including a bit of violence.
The funniest thing is, I’m okay with what happened to him because he had his pride hurt more than his body and…well, FAFO, you Nazi prick. Like, I’m not gonna say “yes, every Nazi needs to be chased down in the street so they can be punched and maced”, but I ain’t gonna fuckin’ cry about it if and when it happens. If he’d been beaten bad enough to send him to the hospital, maybe I’d have an iota of pity for him. As it is, the fucker got what he deserved. Were I less cynical, I would hope he learns the right lesson from this.
And side note: Hell yeah to that class on standing up to that fucker. That’s how you fucking show solidarity, people! You wanna chase Nazis and assholes out, you gotta do it together!
Better an enemy than a 'friend'/collaborator to a despot
You can fairly judge a person by who and what they consider their enemies.
You can also pretty fairly judge a person by who considers them as enemies.
To be considered an ‘enemy’ by Trump and/or his regime should be seen and treated by both the target of the accusation and all around them as a mark of pride that they’re doing something right, and not even remotely something to be ashamed or sorry for.
Goddamn it, I’m still not on the list!
Re:
I too am disappointed first I didn’t make tricky dick list and now also this one, I have to figure out what I am doing wrong.
Someone kindly correct me if I’m misinformed — but as far as I know, every victim of that shooting was a detainee, and in restraints when shot.
Re:
I haven’t looked into the matter myself personally so I might be mistaken but that was my understanding as well, that every person shot was a detainee, not an member of the US gestapo, which makes the idea that he was aiming for them as opposed to those detained rather difficult to believe.
Re:
The shooter shot at the van as it was arriving at the ICE facility. He couldn’t actually see/target specific people. It was just circumstance that inside the van his bullets hit detainees instead of agents.
People trying to create a narrative about why detainees were “targeted” instead of agents seem to miss this crucial detail. He shot at the van, not at specific individuals.
Re: Re: let us be more specific
Come, let us reason together. First step, consider what was actually done. Gunman shot at van full of detained darker-complected people.
Normally, that would suggest that he was seeking to injure the darker-complected people in the van. That is, if we assume that injury is intended to be suffered by those shot at. I think that a relatively uncontroversial assumption.
I suppose he could have aimed through the front windows if he had wanted to hit the operators of the van. That is speculation. He did not shoot where ICE goons were, he shot where the darker-complected people were.
The theory that he actually intended to injure ICE goons is supported only by the flimsiest of (not actually visible to public) evidence. Is he anti-ICE because he is shooting rather than shipping? He is not in a position to explain his motives at this point. We are therefore remitted to looking at the acts, which acts were firing shots where darker-complected, restrained detainees should be expected to be.
Rather than speculate that he intended a result other than what should be expected from his actions, I think it simpler to posit that he acted intentionally.
Trump can go ahead and me to the list then because his fat fascist ass and his modern day SS wannabes at ICE can suck my asshole.
Will this finally distract from good buddy Jeffrey?
Ahh well we’re pouring gasoline
So dance around the fire that we once believed in
Ahh and we’ll never be the same now
Cause there’s nothing left for us to bleed
Give it up the champions of greed
So come around and have another round on me
Dance fucker dance let the motherfucker burn!
Lyrics from Slim Pickings Does the Right Thing and Rides the Bomb to Hell by The Offspring
This is exactly it. The GOP’s whole framing is projection. They cry about the “RaDiCaL lEfT!!1!” while building the apparatus of authoritarianism in real time. Steven Crowder going back to doing his “The Left is Violent: Change My Mind” tour while right-wingers are the ones actually pulling triggers (eg the Trump and Kirk shootings) is the perfect microcosm of it. The ICE example makes it even clearer: you call out cruelty, and somehow that is the real incitement to violence. Not the masked, unmarked men kidnapping people off the street.
It’s Orwellian, and it only works because Democrats (with a few exceptions) keep answering fascism with strongly worded tweets instead of real checks on power. The “sorest winners” line hits the nail on the head: Republicans have everything in Washington, yet still have to invent bogeymen to keep their base scared and angry. The danger isn’t just that the right lies about where violence is coming from. It’s that they’re normalizing the violence they commit, and daring anyone to stop them.
Declaring them as what? Proofread before posting.
Re:
Forget your password, Ehud?
Nothing is a big deal anymore.
Ok. So?
Next.
Yawn.
(Just explaining how it is seen in today’s USA, by the population of the USA).
No one will do anything. And everyone knows it.
Complacency is the end all, be all.