XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, can.politics   
   From: katt@gmail.com   
      
   On Sun, 11 Jan 2026 22:41:16 -0800,  Alan says...   
      
   > > Why wouldn't local law work with ICE instead of turning   
   > > their backs? Turnabout is fair play.   
   >   
   > What does that have to do with why the feds are PREVENTING local law   
   > enforcement from investigatin?   
      
   Why waste the time and effort?   
      
   ALL of the evidence is here:   
      
   https://x.com/i/status/2009679932289626385   
      
   Also... who is "preventing" local law enforcement from investigating.   
      
   Is this just another one of your ruses... you know... talk about the minutiae   
   of an incident, instead of the facts.   
      
   In most cases, federal authorities cannot LEGALLY stop local jurisdictions   
   from conducting their own investigation into the same incident.   
      
   HOWEVER, there are specific SCENARIOS and legal mechanisms where the federal   
   government takes the lead.   
      
   I will break this down for you one baby step at a time as you so desperately   
   need us to.   
      
   Understanding Concurrent Jurisdiction in the Minneapolis Incident:   
      
   In the case of the ICE agent being struck by a vehicle in Minneapolis, the act   
   likely violates both federal law (assaulting or killing a federal officer) and   
   Minnesota state law (criminal vehicular homicide or assault).   
      
   Under the principle of dual sovereignty, both the FBI/Homeland Security and   
   the Minneapolis Police Department have the legal right to investigate. The   
   federal government cannot simply "order" the local police to stop their   
   investigation, as the state has its own independent interest in enforcing   
   Minnesota's laws.   
      
   So... I want to know your source for you saying the feds "are PREVENTING local   
   law enforcement from investigatin(sic)."   
      
   Does this make sense to you so far?   
      
      
   The Physical Control of the Scene:   
      
   While both agencies have legal authority, THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CAN TAKE   
   PHYSICAL CONTROL OF THE IMMEDIATE CRIME SCENE if it occurs on federal property   
   or INVOLVES FEDERAL VICTIMS.   
      
   In the Minneapolis incident, FEDERAL AGENTS WOULD LIKELY ESTABLISH A PERIMETER   
   to protect evidence specific to the federal crime (assault on an officer).   
      
   However, because the incident occurred on city streets, THE MINNEAPOLIS POLICE   
   DEPARTMENT (MPD) STILL MAINTAINS ITS RIGHT TO COLLECT EVIDENCE for state-level   
   charges. Usually, they agree to a Joint Investigation or a "Task Force" model   
   rather than competing for the space.   
      
   So... WHO is this entity that you keep whining about, keeping Minneapolis or   
   Minnesota from investigating?   
      
   I'm sure, that when the feds are finished with their investigation and/or   
   subsequent prosecution or trial (which doesn't seem likely LOL, at this time),   
   they will gladly give MN/MS the evidence they need. (but might not want)   
      
   Are you with me so far?   
      
   Shall I explain to you what happens if the two agencies disagree on who gets   
   to keep the evidence?  OK   
      
   Legal Friction and Evidence Control   
      
   In the recent Minneapolis case involving the death of Renee Nicole Good, we   
   see a real-world breakdown of this cooperation. While THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT   
   CANNOT LEGALLY "CANCEL" MINNESOTA'S JURISDICTION, they CAN effectively STALL   
   it by withholding physical evidence until they no longer need it to make a   
   case.   
      
   Evidence Seizure: In this specific incident, the FBI took custody of the   
   primary evidence-including the vehicle involved and the agent's firearm.   
      
   Do you know what "standard operation procedure" (SOP) means?   
      
   The Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension (BCA) was initially part of the   
   probe but was later told by federal authorities that they would no longer have   
   access to case materials, witness interviews, or forensic data.   
      
   S.O.P.   
      
   The Result: Without that evidence, local prosecutors (like the Hennepin County   
   Attorney) find it nearly impossible to complete their own investigation, even   
   though they have the legal right to do so.   
      
   Federal trumps local and state. They aren't "preventing" them from   
   investigation... they simply have to wait their turn.   
      
   =============================================================================   
      
   "Trump Derangement Syndrome" Is a Real Mental Condition   
      
   All you need to know about "Trump Derangement Syndrome," or TDS.   
      
   "Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS) is a mental condition in which a person has   
   been driven effectively insane due to their dislike of Donald Trump, to the   
   point at which they will abandon all logic and reason."   
      
   Justin Raimondo, the editorial director of Antiwar.com, wrote a piece in the   
   Los Angeles Times in 2016 that broke TDS down into three distinct phases or   
   stages:   
      
   "In the first stage of the disease, victims lose all sense of proportion. The   
   president-elect's every tweet provokes a firestorm, as if 140 characters were   
   all it took to change the world."   
      
   "The mid-level stages of TDS have a profound effect on the victim's   
   vocabulary: Sufferers speak a distinctive language consisting solely of   
   hyperbole."   
      
   "As TDS progresses, the afflicted lose the ability to distinguish fantasy from   
   reality."   
      
   The Point here is simple: TDS is, in the eyes of its adherents, the knee-jerk   
   opposition from liberals to anything and everything Trump does. If Trump   
   announced he was donating every dollar he's ever made, TDS sufferers would   
   suggest he was up to something nefarious, according to the logic of TDS.   
   There's nothing - not. one. thing. - that Trump could do or say that would be   
   received positively by TDSers.   
      
   The history of Trump Derangement Syndrome actually goes back to the early   
   2000s - a time when the idea of Trump as president was a punch line for late-   
   night comics and nothing more.   
      
   Wikipedia traces its roots to "Bush Derangement Syndrome" - a term first   
   coined by the late conservative columnist Charles Krauthammer back in 2003.   
   The condition, as Krauthammer defined it, was "the acute onset of paranoia in   
   otherwise normal people in reaction to the policies, the presidency - nay -   
   the very existence of George W. Bush."   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)