Posted on 06/09/2025 4:23:17 AM PDT by george76
The left threw violent anti-immigration protests in seven different areas of Los Angeles beginning on Friday, and you’ll never guess who paid for it.
If you guessed "you," you are right.
Not only are taxpayers paying for the initial ICE raids, which netted 44 illegal aliens, but we’re paying for the police, sheriff's deputies, enhanced California Highway Patrol, and the federal response to the violent protests against the ICE raids, too. But that's only the half of it.
Most Americans are only too willing to pay for law enforcement, but it turns out that you’re also paying for the L.A. immigration protesters, too! But that's not the worst of it, so you'll just have to keep on reading.
Arsonists who start strip mall fires, set cars on fire, swarm streets, block federal officers, and toss bottles (Molotov cocktails?) at the cops don’t come cheap. Besides, somebody has to pay for these signs and the hype men in that flatbed pickup truck, trying to raise the rabble.
A communist party printed those signs for the protesters, according to Data Republican on X.
She also reports that taxpayers underwrite one of these groups to the tune of $34 million.
...
Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights (CHIRLA), a Los Angeles nonprofit that has long provided legal and advocacy services to illegal aliens. CHIRLA is known for radical positions on immigration—for example, it led a campaign to abolish ICE in 2018.
...
Los Angeles Rapid Response Network’s [LARRN] .. is organized by a coalition of nonprofits, and CHIRLA plays a central role
...
The leader of SEIU California and SEIU-United Service Workers West, David Huerta
(Excerpt) Read more at pjmedia.com ...
Anyone remember the name of these 2??
Thank you, Joe Biden..../s
Actually Radical Pres Jill .
The CCP paid operative .
This evil adulteress is a Madame Mao radical .
Arrest this monster .
Charlottesville, Baltimore and OWS this is all part of Democrat summer School for radicals.
Grok:
The concept of “enemy combatants” and their punishment on U.S. soil is complex, governed by a mix of domestic law, international law, and military regulations, with significant legal developments since the term gained prominence post-9/11. The maximum punishment depends on the specific legal framework applied, the status of the individual (e.g., lawful vs. unlawful combatant, U.S. citizen vs. non-citizen), and the nature of the offense. Below is a concise overview based on available information:
Legal Framework and Punishment
Definition of Enemy Combatant:
An “enemy combatant” historically refers to individuals engaged in hostilities against the U.S., either lawfully (e.g., members of an enemy state’s armed forces) or unlawfully (e.g., non-state actors like al-Qaeda or Taliban fighters). The term was notably used during the Bush administration to detain individuals without charge, often outside standard criminal law processes.
In 2009, the Obama administration moved away from the term “enemy combatant” for Guantánamo detainees, though the legal authority to detain under the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) persists.
Unlawful Enemy Combatants:
Military Commissions Act of 2006 (MCA): This law applies to alien (non-U.S. citizen) unlawful enemy combatants. Military commissions can try offenses like terrorism, espionage, or violations of the law of war, with punishments up to life imprisonment or the death penalty, depending on the offense (e.g., murder in violation of the law of war).
Jurisdiction: Military commissions have jurisdiction over non-citizens determined to be unlawful enemy combatants by a Combatant Status Review Tribunal (CSRT) or similar body. Punishments are not fixed but can include death for severe offenses, as prescribed by the Secretary of Defense.
Lawful Enemy Combatants:
Lawful combatants (e.g., members of a state’s armed forces) captured during conflict are treated as prisoners of war (POWs) under the Third Geneva Convention. They cannot be punished for lawful acts of war but may face trial for war crimes via courts-martial under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). Punishments vary by offense, potentially including death for grave breaches like murder or treason.
U.S. Citizens as Enemy Combatants:
U.S. citizens can be designated enemy combatants (e.g., Ex parte Quirin (1942) and Hamdi v. Rumsfeld (2004)), but their detention and trial are subject to constitutional protections. They may face criminal charges in federal courts for offenses like treason (18 U.S.C. § 2381, punishable by death or imprisonment for not less than five years) or material support for terrorism (18 U.S.C. § 2339B, up to 20 years or life if death results).
The Supreme Court’s rulings in Rasul v. Bush (2004) and Boumediene v. Bush (2008) ensure habeas corpus rights, meaning detainees (citizen or not) can challenge their detention in federal courts, potentially limiting indefinite detention without charge.
Specific Offenses Under UCMJ:
For acts like aiding the enemy (Article 103b, UCMJ), the maximum punishment can include death or other penalties as a court-martial directs, especially in wartime.
Espionage under the UCMJ or federal law (18 U.S.C. §§ 792-799) may carry life imprisonment or, in military contexts, the death penalty.
Recent Developments:
Post-9/11, the focus has shifted toward federal courts for prosecuting terrorism-related cases, with the Obama administration advocating trials in civilian courts over military commissions.
The MCA and AUMF still allow military detention, but habeas corpus challenges and due process requirements limit indefinite detention without trial.
Key Considerations
Location (U.S. Mainland): On U.S. soil, constitutional protections (e.g., due process, habeas corpus) apply more robustly than at extraterritorial sites like Guantánamo. Federal courts are the primary venue for citizens and, increasingly, non-citizens.
Punishment Limits: The death penalty is the maximum punishment for severe offenses like treason, espionage, or war crimes causing death. Less severe offenses may result in life imprisonment or lesser terms, depending on the charge.
International Law: The Geneva Conventions do not grant rights to unlawful combatants, but U.S. policy under Obama required compliance with Common Article 3 (prohibiting torture, ensuring humane treatment).
Conclusion
The maximum punishment for enemy combatants on the U.S. mainland varies:
Unlawful enemy combatants (non-citizens): Death penalty or life imprisonment via military commissions for war crimes or terrorism-related offenses.
Lawful combatants: Detention as POWs, with potential death penalty or life imprisonment for war crimes via courts-martial.
U.S. citizens: Death penalty or lengthy imprisonment (e.g., 5+ years for treason) in federal courts, with constitutional protections.
Eric Rodriguez, SEIU member, is the father of Elias who is charged with murdering two at a DC Jewish center
Bet the stolen tax payer moneys DOGE uncovered going to NGO’s is fueling this insurrection
What should we do, organize a protest demonstration? Make up cute little rhyming chants? Set fire to the hardware store? Bring young children along for dramatic effect? Have our “smart” phones record everything to give us a false sense of security?
The Fires were only Step. one. This is the Democrat playground and training camp for Obama’s civilian army. Total destruction of LA is the goal. Clear the streets so they have total control.
Useful information. Thank you.
Thank you. I think he is a BIG SHOT IN THE SEIU, NOT JUST A MEMBER.
Is Eric Rodriguez in LA? His son murdered those 2 Israeli diplomats.
We’ve got the Second Amendment to take care of maggots who block your way and waste your time with their childish foolishness as you try to go about your daily business. America is not Europe. Now that the DemonRATS have launched their fiery Civil War, Americans need to start using it.
Yes, and when this is all over - these “protesters” will file lawsuits against the LAPD and city of LA for police brutality.
Count on it.
And, in Los Angeles, they will win.
P
Call congress-——WHO’S BEHIND THE ANTI-ICE RIOTS IN LOS ANGELES?
Hundreds took to the streets this weekend: blocking roads, attacking federal officers, even burning flags. But this wasn’t “spontaneous outrage.” This was organized. Funded. Coordinated.
At the center of the funding web is CHIRLA—the Coalition for Humane Immigration Rights. Documents reveal the group saw a shocking jump from $12 million to $34 million in government grants in just one year.
While most of that is believed to come from the State of California, the group has received federal funding as well.
If you are unable to contact your rep using their contact form, the Clerk of the House maintains addresses and phone numbers of all House members and Committees.
Or you may call (202) 224-3121 for the U.S. House switchboard operator.
What began as a so-called “spontaneous protest” against ICE enforcement operations in Los Angeles has now been exposed as something far more insidious: a well-funded, coordinated riot, with ties to radical left-wing organizations, government-backed NGOs, and even a billionaire known for pushing Chinese Communist propaganda.
According to a damning exposé by investigative account @DataRepublican, several nonprofit organizations and shadowy political fronts played a pivotal role in igniting the chaos that saw federal officers attacked, flags burned, and city streets blocked.
But what’s more alarming: tens of millions of dollars in taxpayer money may have indirectly fueled the unrest.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.