Homan slams ‘buffoon' Nadler over comments on ICE agent attacks
'What attacks on ICE agents?' Nadler asked in a clip that aired on Fox News.
'This buffoon knows exactly what attacks — his party is the one encouraging them,' Homan responded on X. 'ICE agents are facing an 830% increase in assaults because of smears from the left. Their words have consequences. We won't let them pretend they don't.'
ICE enforcement actions have been met by protesters in several high-profile incidents, most recently in Camarillo, Calif., where 200 people without legal status in the U.S. were arrested in a raid at a marijuana farm. Agents used tear gas to disperse protesters, and one person died after falling from a roof during the raid.
Department of Homeland Security (DHS) officials have also targeted Democratic lawmakers on the basis of claims they have attacked immigration officers.
Rep. LaMonica Iver (D-N.J.), for example, pleaded not guilty to an assault charge stemming from an incident where her elbows appeared to come into contact with an officer during a crowded scene.
In his response to Nadler, Homan cited a DHS statistic released last week, claiming assaults against ICE agents are at an 830 percent increase, more than double the 413 percent increase it claimed in May. The agency claims that Democratic officials and media reports have encouraged assaults against agents.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Chicago Tribune
28 minutes ago
- Chicago Tribune
Supreme Court allows Trump to remove 3 Democrats on the Consumer Product Safety Commission
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Wednesday allowed the Trump administration to remove three Democratic members of the Consumer Product Safety Commission, who had been fired by President Donald Trump and then reinstated by a federal judge. The justices acted on an emergency appeal from the Justice Department, which argued that the agency is under Trump's control and the president is free to remove commissioners without cause. That's what Trump did in May, providing no reason for removing all three Democratic commissioners on the five-person board, despite a federal law that allows commissioners to be fired only for 'neglect of duty or malfeasance.' The court provided a brief, unsigned explanation that the case is similar to earlier ones in which it allowed Trump to fire board members of other independent agencies, whom Congress protected from arbitrary dismissals. The three liberal justices dissented. 'By means of such actions, this Court may facilitate the permanent transfer of authority, piece by piece by piece, from one branch of Government to another,' Justice Elena Kagan wrote for herself, as well as Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson. The commission helps protect consumers from dangerous products by issuing recalls, suing errant companies and more. The fired commissioners had been serving seven-year terms after being nominated by President Joe Biden. U.S. District Judge Matthew Maddox in Baltimore ruled in June that the dismissals were unlawful. Maddox sought to distinguish the commission's role from those of other agencies where the Supreme Court has allowed firings to go forward. A month earlier, the high court's conservative majority declined to reinstate members of the National Labor Relations Board and the Merit Systems Protection Board, finding that the Constitution appears to give the president the authority to fire the board members 'without cause.' The administration has argued that all the agencies are under Trump's control as the head of the executive branch. Maddox, a Biden nominee, noted that it can be difficult to characterize the product safety commission's functions as purely executive. The fight over the president's power to fire could prompt the court to consider overturning a 90-year-old Supreme Court decision known as Humphrey's Executor. In that case from 1935, the court unanimously held that presidents cannot fire independent board members without cause. The decision ushered in an era of powerful independent federal agencies charged with regulating labor relations, employment discrimination, the airwaves and much else. But it has long rankled conservative legal theorists who argue the modern administrative state gets the Constitution all wrong because such agencies should answer to the president. Kagan wrote that the court already has 'all but overturned Humphrey's Executor.' Other removals are making their way to the high court, including the firing of a member of the Federal Trade Commission, the very agency at issue in Humphrey's Executor. Last week, a federal judge ordered Rebecca Slaughter reinstated as a commissioner. Slaughter returned to work Friday. By Tuesday, she had been sidelined again after an appeals court temporarily blocked the judge's order. The Consumer Product Safety Commission was created in 1972. Its five members must maintain a partisan split, with no more than three representing the president's party. They serve staggered terms. That structure ensures that each president has 'the opportunity to influence, but not control,' the commission, attorneys for the fired commissioners wrote in court filings. They argued the recent terminations could jeopardize the commission's independence.
Chicago Tribune
28 minutes ago
- Chicago Tribune
House Democrats launch bid to subpoena Justice Department for Epstein files
WASHINGTON — House Democrats launched a bid Wednesday to subpoena President Donald Trump's Justice Department for files in the sex trafficking investigation into Jeffrey Epstein, goading GOP lawmakers to defy Trump and Republican leadership to support the action. Democrats on a subcommittee of the powerful House Committee on Oversight made a motion for the subpoena Wednesday afternoon, just hours before the House was scheduled to end its July work session and depart Washington for a monthlong break. The subcommittee's Republican chairman, Rep. Clay Higgins of Louisiana, postponed a vote on the matter until the end of the meeting. While several Republicans on the panel are members of a right-wing faction and have called for the release of the files, it was not clear whether they would vote for the subpoena. During a brief break in the meeting, Higgins told reporters he expected the motion for the subpoena to pass with some changes. 'If the Republican Party, if our colleagues on this committee don't join us in this vote, then what they're essentially doing is joining President Donald Trump in complicity,' Rep. Summer Lee, the Pennsylvania Democrat who made the motion for the subpoena, told reporters outside the hearing room. The move by Democrats showed how they were doing practically everything in their power to force Republicans to act on the Epstein files. House Speaker Mike Johnson — caught between demands from Trump and clamoring from his own members for the House to act — has resisted calls for action and prepared to send the House home a day early. Johnson told reporters earlier Wednesday there was no need to vote on legislation calling for the release of the Epstein files this week because the Trump administration is 'already doing everything within their power to release them.' Yet Democrats have delighted this week in pressing Republicans to support the release of the files. Their efforts halted the GOP's legislative agenda for the week and turned attention to an issue that Trump has unsuccessfully implored his supporters to forget about. 'They're fleeing our work, our job and sending us back home because they don't want to vote to release these files. This is something that they ran on. This is something that they talked about: the importance of transparency, holding pedophiles accountable,' Lee said. Democratic leaders are hoping to make the issue about much more than just Epstein, who died in his New York jail cell six years ago while he awaited trial on sex trafficking charges. 'Why haven't Republicans released the Epstein files to the American people? It's reasonable to conclude that Republicans are continuing to protect the lifestyles of the rich and the shameless, even if that includes pedophiles,' said House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries at a news conference. 'So it's all connected.' It comes as both parties are gearing up to take their messaging to voters on Trump's big multitrillion-dollar tax breaks and spending cuts bill. For Republicans, it's 'beautiful' legislation that will spark economic growth; for Democrats, it's an 'ugly' gift mostly to the richest Americans that undermines health care for low-income people. Yet as furor has grown on the right over the Trump administration's reversal on promises related to Epstein, several Democrats have seized on the opportunity to divide Republicans on the issue. 'This goes to a fundamental sense of, 'Is our government co-opted by rich and powerful people that isn't looking out for ordinary Americans? Or can we have a government that looks out for ordinary Americans?'' said Rep. Ro Khanna, a California Democrat who has put forward a bipartisan bill meant to force release of the files. Republican leaders accuse Democrats of caring about the issue purely for political gain. They point out that the Department of Justice held on to the Epstein investigation through the presidency of Democrat Joe Biden. Trump's Justice Department is also seeking the release of testimony from secret grand jury proceedings in the Epstein case, though that effort is unlikely to produce new revelations. The House Oversight Committee, with support from Republicans, also advanced Tuesday a subpoena for Epstein's former girlfriend, Ghislaine Maxwell, for a deposition. However, those lawmakers who want Congress to take a stronger role in the Epstein files have cautioned that Maxwell, who is serving a prison sentence for helping Epstein sexually abuse underage girls, may be an unreliable witness. 'It's a good idea, but it's not enough. It's not nearly enough,' said Rep. Thomas Massie, a Kentucky Republican who has pushed the bipartisan bill to pry the records from the Justice Department.
The Hill
28 minutes ago
- The Hill
Hegseth Signal messages came from email labeled ‘SECRET': report
Messages relayed by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth over a March Signal chat regarding the U.S. plans to bomb Houthi targets in Yemen came from a email labeled 'SECRET/NOFORN,' according to the Pentagon's independent watchdog. People familiar with the report told The Washington Post that the attack plans had initially been shared with more than a dozen defense officials via a classified email sent over a classified system by U.S. Central Command head Gen. Michael 'Erik' Kurilla. Hegseth then posted the details in the unclassified Signal group chat directly before Washington launched its attacks on March 15. He also shared the information in a separate chat that included his wife, brother and personal attorney. The military labels material 'SECRET' if unauthorized disclosure could potentially cause serious damage to national security, while 'NOFORN' means the email was not meant for anyone who is a foreign national. The findings from the Defense Department Inspector General's office seems to contradict the Trump administration's repeated, adamant claims that no classified information was shared in the Signal group chats, which were revealed after the editor-in-chief of The Atlantic was inadvertently added to one. The DOD IG's office began to look into the incident in April after Republican and Democratic members of the Senate Armed Services Committee requested it do so. The revelation also offers a new headache for Hegseth, who has faced mounting criticism over the leaked Signal chats, his management style, and his reported decision to pause military aid to Ukraine without President Trump's approval. Numerous Democrats and at least one Republican have called for Hegseth to resign or be fired over the leak scandal. In a statement to The Hill on Wednesday, chief Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell doubled down on the claim that no classified information was shared on Signal, calling the 'narrative' 'old and worn out.' 'The Department stands behind its previous statements: no classified information was shared via Signal. As we've said repeatedly, nobody was texting war plans and the success of the Department's recent operations–from Operation Rough Rider to Operation Midnight Hammer–are proof that our operational security and discipline are top notch,' Parnell said, touting the military campaign against the Houthis in Yemen and U.S. strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities last month. The Post reported that Kurilla sent his sensitive message over a classified system known as the Secret Internet Protocol Router Network (SIPRNet). He included a rundown of strike plans for March 15, including when bombing was expected to begin and what kind of aircraft and weapons would be used. Two people told the Post that they were not aware of any discussions for Hegseth to declassify and downgrade the information Kurilla sent – as government regulations can allow – before he sent it to the Signal chats. Former White House national security adviser Michael Waltz, who created the Signal chat, was removed from his job two months after the scandal broke but has since been nominated to be U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. At his nomination hearing last week, Waltz also insisted that 'no classified information was shared.'
