this post was submitted on 07 Aug 2026
130 points (100.0% liked)

politics

30937 readers
1925 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
  3. No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
  4. No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

For more information, either visit the article directly or view the post with quotes in !crimes_of_ice@lemmy.4d2.org

https://lemmy.4d2.org/post/4603820

top 12 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] RoidingOldMan@lemmy.world 27 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Congress green lit emergency funds for those body cameras recently. How TF did they not write in that the footage has to be shared?

[–] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 11 points 2 weeks ago

Probably intentional.

Also they're not really using the funds for body cameras.

[–] danekrae@lemmy.world 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I'm not american so I don't know, but isn't that part of FOIA?

[–] CaptDust@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Agencies can redact body cam footage in cases of FOIA too, usually used to protect sensitive information or victims by blurring the video or muting audio. Technically this censorship is extended to prevent "exposing law enforcement techniques" as well, I assume ice will try to argue that point broadly.

[–] CobraChicken3000@lemmy.ca 23 points 2 weeks ago

If ICE doesn't get defunded and disbanded by the next Dem in power. Burn it all down.

[–] arin@lemmy.world 9 points 2 weeks ago

Read title and thought this is a good onion title... Fuck this timeline

[–] danekrae@lemmy.world 8 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Corollary: when ICE doesn't release body camera video, it's damning.

[–] Cheebus@lemmy.world 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Fine, not releasing footage should be treated as admission of ICEs guilty. They ought to lose every case they don’t release footage of

[–] foggy@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

Yeah we can literally now presume where there is no body an footage it is because it makes ICE look bad. By their own admission.

[–] Lasherz12@lemmy.world 5 points 2 weeks ago

Total bullshit and it obvious applies to FOIA, but hopefully it will at least now be stored for the record and subpoenas.