LOCK HER UP!' New York AG Letitia James Makes Outrageous Move POLK Against ICE Agents - She's Not Going To Get Away With This

LOCK HER UP!' New York AG Letitia James Makes Outrageous Move POLK Against ICE Agents - She's Not Going To Get Away With This
Posted June 25, 2026
New York Attorney General Letitia James announced Thursday the launch of a portal for New Yorkers to submit photos and videos of federal immigration enforcement activities following an ICE raid on Canal Street that resulted in the arrest of nine individuals described as illegal aliens with criminal histories.
In a post on the social media platform X, James stated that her office would “review and investigate any violations of the law” based on submissions from the public. She said every New Yorker has the right to live without fear or intimidation and urged those who witnessed or documented ICE activity to share footage with her office for review.
The announcement came amid broader Democratic efforts to monitor ICE operations in multiple cities. Rep. Robert Garcia (D-CA) said the House Oversight Committee plans to launch a “master ICE tracker” on its website to document verified locations of ICE agents. Rep. Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.) claimed during a press conference that ICE agents wrongly detained four U.S. citizens for nearly 24 hours without charges during the Canal Street operation, describing the actions as “lawless terror.”

In San Francisco, which is preparing for increased ICE presence, Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) suggested that state and local authorities may arrest federal agents if they violate California law during enforcement operations. Legal experts have noted that the ability of states to prosecute federal officers is limited and generally applies only when agents act outside their legal authority.
James is scheduled to appear in federal court in Virginia on Friday to face charges related to mortgage fraud. She was indicted earlier this month on allegations that she misrepresented a property in Norfolk, Virginia, as a second home on a mortgage application in August 2020. Prosecutors allege the misrepresentation allowed her to obtain a lower interest rate, saving approximately $18,933 over the life of the loan, and that the property was later rented out in violation of the loan terms. The case was referred by Federal Housing Finance Agency Director William Pulte.
The developments occur as the Trump administration has expanded immigration enforcement operations in several major cities. Critics of the federal actions have raised concerns about potential overreach and the treatment of individuals during raids. Supporters argue the operations target individuals with criminal records and are necessary to enforce federal immigration law.
James’s portal and the proposed congressional tracker have drawn criticism from those who view them as efforts to interfere with or intimidate federal law enforcement officers. Supporters of the initiatives argue they provide transparency and accountability for federal operations conducted within local communities.
The criminal case against James will proceed separately in federal court in Virginia, where she is expected to enter a plea on the mortgage fraud charges.
Report this article
Select a reason for reporting:
Comments 0
Posting as Guest '; } return; } var normalizedItems = items.slice().reverse(); var html = normalizedItems.map(function(comment) { var replies = Array.isArray(comment.replies) ? comment.replies : []; var repliesHtml = replies.map(function(reply) { return '' + '' + '' + escapeHtml(initials(reply.author_name)) + '' + '' + '' + escapeHtml(reply.author_name) + '' + escapeHtml(reply.time) + '' + '' + escapeHtml(reply.content) + '
' + '' + '' + '' + ''; }).join(''); return '' + '' + '' + escapeHtml(initials(comment.author_name)) + '' + '' + '' + escapeHtml(comment.author_name) + '' + escapeHtml(comment.time) + '' + '' + escapeHtml(comment.content) + '
' + '' + '' + '' + '' + (repliesHtml ? '' + repliesHtml + '' : '') + ''; }).join(''); if (mode === 'prepend') { listEl.insertAdjacentHTML('afterbegin', html); return; } listEl.insertAdjacentHTML('beforeend', html); } async function loadComments(page, mode) { var query = new URLSearchParams({ post_slug: postSlug, page: String(page), per_page: String(perPage), }); var response = await fetch('/api/post-comments?' + query.toString(), { method: 'GET', headers: { 'Accept': 'application/json' } }); var data = await response.json().catch(function() { return {}; }); if (!response.ok || data.ok === false) { throw new Error((data && data.message) || 'Cannot load comments.'); } var pagination = data.pagination || {}; currentPage = Number(pagination.current_page || 1); lastPage = Number(pagination.last_page || 1); totalCountEl.textContent = String((data.post && data.post.comment_count) || pagination.total || 0); loadMoreBtn.classList.toggle('comment-box__hidden', currentPage >= lastPage); renderComments(data.comments || [], mode); } async function postComment(content, parentId, feedbackTarget, submitTarget) { var authorName = ensureName(false); if (!authorName) { var forced = ensureName(true); if (!forced) { throw new Error('Please enter your name first.'); } authorName = forced; } var payload = { post_slug: postSlug, post_url: window.location.href, author_name: authorName, content: content, }; if (parentId > 0) { payload.parent_id = parentId; } if (submitTarget) submitTarget.disabled = true; if (feedbackTarget) { feedbackTarget.textContent = 'Submitting...'; feedbackTarget.style.color = ''; } try { var response = await fetch('/api/post-comments', { method: 'POST', headers: { 'Content-Type': 'application/json', 'Accept': 'application/json' }, body: JSON.stringify(payload) }); var data = await response.json().catch(function() { return {}; }); if (!response.ok || data.ok === false) { throw new Error((data && data.message) || 'Cannot submit comment.'); } await loadComments(1, 'replace'); return true; } finally { if (submitTarget) submitTarget.disabled = false; } } form.addEventListener('submit', async function(event) { event.preventDefault(); var content = String(contentEl.value || '').trim(); if (!content) { setFeedback('Please enter comment content.', true); return; } submitBtn.disabled = true; setFeedback('Submitting...'); try { await postComment(content, 0); contentEl.value = ''; setFeedback('Comment submitted.'); } catch (error) { setFeedback(error.message || 'Cannot submit comment.', true); } finally { submitBtn.disabled = false; } }); listEl.addEventListener('click', function(event) { var replyBtn = event.target.closest('.comment-item__reply-btn'); if (replyBtn) { var row = replyBtn.closest('.comment-item'); if (!row) return; var formEl = row.querySelector('.comment-item__reply-form'); if (!formEl) return; listEl.querySelectorAll('.comment-item__reply-form').forEach(function(f) { if (f !== formEl) f.classList.add('comment-box__hidden'); }); formEl.classList.remove('comment-box__hidden'); var input = formEl.querySelector('textarea'); if (input) input.focus(); return; } var cancelBtn = event.target.closest('.comment-item__reply-cancel'); if (cancelBtn) { var rf = cancelBtn.closest('.comment-item__reply-form'); if (!rf) return; rf.classList.add('comment-box__hidden'); var rInput = rf.querySelector('textarea'); var rFeedback = rf.querySelector('.comment-item__reply-feedback'); if (rInput) rInput.value = ''; if (rFeedback) rFeedback.textContent = ''; } }); listEl.addEventListener('submit', async function(event) { var replyForm = event.target.closest('.comment-item__reply-form'); if (!replyForm) return; event.preventDefault(); var row = replyForm.closest('.comment-item'); if (!row) return; var parentId = Number(row.getAttribute('data-comment-id') || 0); var input = replyForm.querySelector('textarea'); var submit = replyForm.querySelector('.comment-item__reply-submit'); var feedback = replyForm.querySelector('.comment-item__reply-feedback'); var replyText = String((input && input.value) || '').trim(); if (!replyText) { if (feedback) { feedback.textContent = 'Please enter reply content.'; feedback.style.color = '#dc2626'; } return; } try { await postComment(replyText, parentId, feedback, submit); // setFeedback('Reply submitted.'); } catch (error) { if (feedback) { feedback.textContent = error.message || 'Cannot submit reply.'; feedback.style.color = '#dc2626'; } } }); changeNameBtn.addEventListener('click', function() { ensureName(true); }); loadMoreBtn.addEventListener('click', async function() { if (currentPage >= lastPage) return; loadMoreBtn.disabled = true; try { await loadComments(currentPage + 1, 'prepend'); } catch (error) { setFeedback(error.message || 'Cannot load more comments.', true); } finally { loadMoreBtn.disabled = false; } }); ensureName(false); loadComments(1, 'replace').catch(function(error) { setFeedback(error.message || 'Cannot load comments.', true); }); })();CBS Host LOSES IT After Sen. Kennedy FACT CHECKS Her Trump LIES… THIS GOT BAD!...

CBS Host PRESSES John Kennedy on Trump’s Spending — His Answer Takes an Unexpected Turn

The interview began with some of the biggest questions facing Washington: the conflict with Iran, rising fuel costs, and the approaching midterm elections. But when Republican Senator John Kennedy appeared on Face the Nation with CBS host Margaret Brennan, the conversation quickly moved toward an issue that could shape the political debate for months to come: how the government spends taxpayers’ money.
Kennedy did not pretend that the economic pressure facing American families was insignificant. He argued that voters were far more concerned about the cost of living than the daily battles playing out on television. With oil prices affected by disruptions around the Strait of Hormuz, he said, the consequences of foreign policy were reaching directly into household budgets.
Kennedy Brings the Conversation Back to Affordability
Kennedy’s message to the White House was unusually direct. He predicted that the midterm elections would be close and argued that Republicans needed to keep their attention on the financial concerns of ordinary Americans.
“When moms and dads lie down to sleep at night and can't,” Kennedy told Brennan, they are worried about the cost of living.
He also called for a nationwide address explaining why the United States entered the conflict with Iran, what the administration hoped to achieve, and how it intended to bring the situation to a conclusion.
His position was not a blanket rejection of the administration’s strategy. Kennedy defended continued pressure on Iran while acknowledging the economic consequences of the partially closed strait. He opposed sending American troops into the situation, warning that deploying them could create a new set of problems.
That combination—support for pressure abroad alongside concern about prices at home—set the tone for the rest of the interview.
Nearly $1 Billion in Cuts Sparks a Constitutional Dispute
The conversation became more pointed when Brennan asked about the White House’s decision to cancel nearly $1 billion in previously approved federal funding without congressional consent.
Brennan raised concerns expressed by Senator Susan Collins, the Republican chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, who argued that the move threatened Congress’s constitutional authority over federal spending.
Kennedy disagreed.
“I love Susan like a taco, but she's wrong,” he said before explaining his view that Congress often appropriates money in broad categories, leaving agencies with considerable discretion over how funds are ultimately used.
He then deployed the phrase that would become the interview’s most memorable sound bite: “Spending porn.”
Kennedy used the expression to criticize what he considers wasteful government expenditures, pointing to funding for circumcision programs in Zambia and electric buses in Rwanda. He also argued that Congress should take greater responsibility for identifying and eliminating spending it believes is unnecessary.
But the disagreement was about more than whether particular programs were worthwhile. It raised a larger question: when Congress approves funding, how much authority should the executive branch have to cancel or redirect it?
Kennedy defended the cuts, while Brennan’s question highlighted the legal and constitutional objections. The interview did not resolve that dispute, but it brought the competing arguments into sharp focus.
Then Kennedy Turned the Standard on Trump
The most revealing moment came when Brennan shifted from the proposed cuts to taxpayer-funded advertising.
She asked Kennedy about a government-funded commercial prominently featuring President Donald Trump and praising his leadership. The question echoed earlier controversy surrounding former Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, whose department had spent $220 million on a border-security advertising campaign in which she appeared prominently.
Kennedy had previously criticized Noem’s campaign. Now, with Trump featured in another advertisement paid for by the federal government, Brennan asked whether that spending was appropriate.
Kennedy’s response was notable because he explicitly included his own political allies—and himself—in the principle he was defending.
“I don't think any public official, including President Trump or Kristi Noem or John Kennedy, should spend public money on private ads for themselves,” he said.
He acknowledged that the White House viewed the issue differently but argued that public funds should not be used to promote individual politicians. He also suggested that politicians should not have buildings named after them while they are still alive.
That answer complicated any attempt to portray his position as simply a defense of the administration. Kennedy supported the proposed spending cuts, but he also applied his criticism of taxpayer-funded self-promotion to Trump.
The Real Takeaway From the Interview
The exchange was not a shouting match, nor does the published transcript establish that Brennan lost her composure or that Kennedy fact-checked a series of false statements from her. What it does show is a pointed discussion about economic priorities, congressional spending authority, and whether public money should be used to enhance a politician’s image.
Kennedy’s argument was straightforward: families are worried about affordability, government spending deserves scrutiny, and the rules should apply regardless of party.
Whether viewers agree with his assessment of the proposed cuts is a separate question. The legal dispute over executive spending authority and the debate over taxpayer-funded political advertising deserve examination beyond a few memorable television lines.
The moment worth watching is when Brennan moves from criticizing government spending in general to asking Kennedy about an advertisement featuring Trump himself. That is where the discussion becomes more complicated—and where Kennedy’s stated principle is tested against his own party’s leadership.
Watch the full interview through the link below to hear the exchange in context and decide how convincing each side’s argument really was.