Justice as a pressure tool – Minneapolis in the crosshairs!
The US Department of Justice is examining whether Minnesota Governor Tim Walz and Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey may have obstructed the enforcement of immigration law. The trigger was public statements by both officials criticizing the current ICE offensive. Specifically, the suspicion concerns conspiracy – a charge that carries heavy legal and political weight. Walz responded with unusual openness. First Slotkin, then Powell, before that Mark Kelly – new names, new investigations. For him, this is no coincidence but intimidation. Frey speaks of a clear attempt to silence him because he stood up for his city and its residents.
The background is a massive ICE operation in Minneapolis and St. Paul, described by the Department of Homeland Security as the largest of its kind. More than 2,500 arrests, home raids with battering rams, armed operations. Since the fatal shooting of Renee Good, the situation has escalated further. The case of Garrison Gibson shows how arbitrary the operations have become. Although the 37 year old Liberian has lived legally in the United States for years and was under official supervision, ICE agents broke down his apartment door with a battering ram and arrested him. A federal judge declared the arrest unlawful and ordered his release – only for Gibson to be arrested again shortly afterward at a routine appointment and then released once more. Even ICE acknowledged errors. In Minneapolis, people now constantly carry identification out of fear, and Native Americans are even explicitly urged to do so.
Trump at one point threatened to invoke the Insurrection Act, later walked it back, but left the threat standing. In Minneapolis, fear is growing that protest is being criminalized and political dissent pursued through the courts. What is happening here is more than a dispute over jurisdiction. It is a power struggle – between the state and Washington, between law and Trump, between public criticism and fascism.
Advertising now here as well
ChatGPT will no longer remain ad free. OpenAI plans to test advertisements in the coming weeks for users who do not have a paid subscription. The ads are to appear at the bottom of responses, clearly labeled and supposedly without influencing content. The move does not come as a surprise. More than 800 million people use the service for free, while the company burns more money than it takes in despite its high valuation. Data centers, chips, infrastructure – all of this costs money, and subscriptions alone are apparently not enough.
OpenAI emphasizes that it will not use personal data or user inputs for advertising purposes. Critics nevertheless warn that anyone who uses a chatbot as an adviser, companion, or tool brings trust into the interaction – and that is precisely what makes advertising here problematic. One thing is clear: free was never really free. Now it becomes visible what the price is.
Judge halts rules of engagement – fundamental rights apply even in a state of emergency
US District Judge Kate Menendez on late Friday evening imposed tight limits on the rules of engagement for federal authorities in the greater Minneapolis area. During what is currently the largest immigration operation in the United States, federal agents may neither arrest peaceful demonstrators nor attack them with tear gas – even if they are merely observing operations. The decision was issued in an emergency proceeding filed in December on behalf of six activists from Minnesota and four journalists. The plaintiffs argued that state authorities had repeatedly violated fundamental rights during protests. The court followed this argument on key points.
The ruling explicitly prohibits forces from stopping or detaining drivers, passengers, or occupants of vehicles unless there is concrete suspicion that they are obstructing or interfering with officers’ work. Simply following enforcement vehicles at a reasonable distance is not sufficient to justify a stop or seizure.
Menendez made unmistakably clear that arrests are permissible only when there is reasonable suspicion of a crime or actual interference with official duties. Mere presence at the scene or observation of state actions falls under constitutional protection. The plaintiffs were represented by the American Civil Liberties Union of Minnesota, which accuses federal authorities of systematically disregarding freedom of assembly and free expression in the Twin Cities. Government attorneys had argued that agents were acting within their authority to enforce immigration law and protect themselves.
The court did not accept that view. The First Amendment, the judge said, applies even in tense situations. Arbitrary detentions are impermissible, and security forces may not go beyond what the law allows. The order requires the involved federal agencies, including immigration units, to realign their conduct during protests. For the moment, this is a clear legal victory for activists and the media. But in Minneapolis, people now know that such decisions often mark not an endpoint, but the opening of the next round in court.
To be continued .....
The self proclaimed tariff king
Donald Trump calls himself the “tariff king” and declares that this king has done a great job. Economic policy turns into a fairy tale hour, tariffs appear not as measures with consequences, but as a personal badge of success. Prices, supply chains, international tensions remain invisible. What counts is Trump, not the outcome for consumers or businesses. The state becomes a stage show on which the president applauds himself, complexity reduced to a crown. Anyone who objects only disturbs the image. This is what nonsense sounds like when it no longer needs to explain itself, like stories from 1001 Nights.
Vance speaks at the March for Life
JD Vance’s office has confirmed that the vice president will speak on January 23, 2026 in Washington at the March for Life. The annual rally of abortion opponents on the National Mall regularly draws thousands and serves as a fixed platform for conservative top politicians. Vance appeared there in person last year as well. Donald Trump will also be present, albeit via a pre recorded video message. He said so to reporters on Friday. The White House is thus continuing its close political alignment with the movement. The vice president’s appearance underscores how significant the issue is for the administration. The march thus remains not only a social event, but a clearly political one.
When guilt disappears and MAGA belief explains everything
It should not come as a surprise that he is not part of the family’s lawsuit – that is MAGA.
There are statements that reveal more about a political worldview than any campaign speech. The words of Renee Good’s former father in law are among them. He says he watched the video, says the car may have struck the officer, and at the same time insists that no one bears blame. Not ICE. Not Renee. Not her partner. Guilt dissolves in MAGA delusion. Instead, something else moves to the center: the spiritual state of the woman who was killed. That she was “not ready to meet the Lord.” That she acted in the wrong spirit at the wrong moment. The death of a woman is thus not seen as the result of state violence or escalated operations, but reinterpreted as a spiritual failure.
Here, exemplarily, one sees what MAGA is at its core. Not anger, not volume, but the ability to blank out real power relations and replace them with belief systems. When something goes wrong, it is never the system, never armed authorities, never political decisions. It is always the individual, their attitude, their faith, their supposed inadequacy. This form of interpretation is convenient. It relieves the state, protects the perpetrators, soothes one’s own conscience. Whoever hands everything over to God does not have to hold anyone accountable. Whoever spiritualizes guilt no longer has to ask questions. Renee Good’s former father in law thus stands not accidentally, but exemplarily, for an attitude that tolerates violence as long as it can be religiously explained in the MAGA sense. It is a worldview in which compassion ends where responsibility begins. And that is precisely why it is so dangerous.
A borrowed peace prize and plenty of self praise
Donald Trump says he accepted the Nobel Peace Prize medal from María Corina Machado because she offered it to him. It was a “very nice gesture,” he explained on his way to Florida. He added that no one deserved the prize more than he himself, after all he had ended eight wars. That he says this is hardly surprising. Machado, Venezuela’s opposition leader and official recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize, had handed Trump the medal during a meeting at the White House. Trump accepted it, praised her as a “very fine woman,” and hinted at further talks. The symbolic act seemed larger than it is – and that is precisely its appeal.
Shortly afterward, the Norwegian Nobel Committee felt compelled to bring some order into the matter. Prizes cannot be transferred, shared, or reassigned. The award remains with the person to whom it was granted. Medals, however, may be given away, sold, or donated. That has been the case for decades, the committee explained matter of factly. The conclusion remains: Trump now owns a medal, but not a prize. The Nobel Peace Prize still belongs to Machado. What remains is a familiar image: abundant self attribution, a symbolic object – and the attempt to draw significance from proximity rather than decision.
Pardon instead of judgment
Donald Trump will die frühere Gouverneurin von Puerto Rico, Wanda VázquezDonald Trump plans to pardon former Puerto Rico governor Wanda Vázquez. A White House aide confirmed this. Vázquez pleaded guilty last August in a federal case involving a campaign finance violation. Sentencing had been scheduled for the end of this month. Prosecutors had sought a prison sentence of one year. Vázquez’s defense rejected that and accused investigators of undermining a prior agreement under which more serious charges such as bribery and fraud had been dropped. In the end, the remaining allegation was that she accepted a promise of a campaign donation that never materialized.
From Trump’s circle, it is said that the president views the case as politically motivated. The investigation began shortly after Vázquez publicly supported Trump in 2020. She belongs to the pro statehood New Progressive Party and was long considered a loyal ally. Whether the case would have ended in a prison sentence without a pardon is now secondary. The decision follows a familiar pattern: proximity protects, loyalty counts, justice becomes a matter of perspective.
