ICE

The meme you shared is a common one that circulates on social media (often labeled as "Fact X"), comparing deportation numbers under Presidents Clinton, George W. Bush, Obama, and Trump (first term), while claiming zero protests/riots under Clinton, Bush, and Obama but 350 under Trump.

The deportation figures are **partially accurate but misleading** due to inconsistent definitions of "deportations." Official U.S. government data (from DHS and ICE) distinguishes between:

- **Removals** (formal deportations with legal consequences, often from the interior U.S., requiring court orders).

- **Returns** (mostly quick turnbacks at the border, without formal orders; these dominate high totals under earlier presidents).

The meme uses the **broader total** (removals + returns) for Clinton (12.5 million), Bush (10.3 million), and Obama (5.2 million), but switches to a much **narrower removals-only** figure for Trump (1.5 million). This apples-to-oranges comparison inflates the numbers for the first three while understating Trump's.

Reliable sources (Migration Policy Institute, DHS yearbooks, FactCheck.org, Cato Institute) show:

- **Clinton (1993–2000)**: ~12.3 million total (removals + returns), but only ~827,000–2 million formal removals (93% were border returns).

- **George W. Bush (2001–2008)**: ~10.3 million total (removals + returns), with ~2 million formal removals (81% returns).

- **Obama (2009–2016)**: ~5 million total (removals + returns), but ~3 million formal removals (highest for removals, earning the "Deporter in Chief" label from critics).

- **Trump (first term, 2017–2020)**: ~1.5–2 million total (removals + returns; lower overall due to fewer border crossings in later years and policy shifts).

If using consistent metrics (e.g., formal removals), Obama deported the most (~3 million), followed by Bush (~2 million), with Clinton and Trump lower. The meme's "0 protests/riots" claim for Clinton/Bush/Obama is also **false or exaggerated** — protests occurred under all administrations (e.g., against family separations, workplace raids, and high removals under Obama), but large-scale riots tied directly to deportations were limited. Under Trump's first term, protests were notable (e.g., against family separations and travel bans), but the "350" figure appears unsubstantiated or invented (no major source confirms exactly that number of protests/riots specifically from deportations).

The meme selectively uses data to imply hypocrisy in public reactions (more outrage under Trump despite fewer deportations), but ignores context: protests often stem from policy tactics (e.g., raids on families vs. border turnbacks), not just raw numbers. Border returns (common under Clinton/Bush) rarely sparked the same backlash as interior removals targeting long-term residents.

In short, the meme cherry-picks and distorts statistics for political effect. Deportation enforcement happened under both parties, with varying approaches and public responses.

Henry McClure  
785.383.9994
sent from mobile 📱
time kills deals

ICE

The question "Does ICE need a warrant for their actions?" depends on the specific action ICE (U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement) is taking, as their authority under U.S. immigration law differs from standard criminal law enforcement.

ICE officers generally **do not need a judicial warrant** (one signed by a judge) for many routine enforcement actions, unlike police in criminal cases. Instead, they often rely on administrative warrants (issued internally by ICE) or warrantless authority granted by statutes like the Immigration and Nationality Act (e.g., 8 U.S.C. §§ 1226, 1357).

Key distinctions:

- **Arrests**: ICE can arrest individuals without a judicial warrant if they have reason to believe the person is removable (deportable) under immigration law. They use administrative warrants (forms like I-200 or I-205), which are not reviewed by a neutral magistrate and do not carry the same protections as criminal warrants. ICE explicitly states it does not need judicial warrants for arrests in public places or under certain conditions. For entering private homes or areas with a reasonable expectation of privacy, ICE generally needs consent or a judicial warrant—administrative warrants alone do not authorize forced entry.

- **Searches and entry into private spaces**: A judicial warrant is typically required to enter homes, private businesses, or other protected areas without consent. ICE cannot use an administrative warrant to force entry into a residence. Exceptions include exigent circumstances or voluntary consent (sometimes obtained via ruses, which have raised criticism).

- **Surveillance and data collection**: This is where concerns about "mass surveillance without warrants" arise. Recent reports (from 2025–2026) indicate ICE has expanded use of purchased commercial data and tools, including:

  - Location data from cell phones (via vendors like Penlink's Webloc, allowing tracking of movements without warrants by buying bulk data).

  - Social media monitoring, facial recognition (e.g., Clearview AI, Mobile Fortify), license plate readers (e.g., Flock Safety), and other spyware or AI tools.

  - These practices often bypass traditional warrant requirements because the government purchases data from private companies rather than compelling it directly, which critics (including the ACLU and EFF) argue circumvents Fourth Amendment protections. Courts have ruled in cases like Carpenter v. United States (2018) that certain location data requires warrants, but agencies exploit loopholes with bought data. This has led to accusations of warrantless mass surveillance affecting citizens and non-citizens alike, including tracking without individualized suspicion.

Your post references a Kansas House bill (likely one condemning the WHO/UN, repurposed via amendment by Rep. Susan Ruiz to target ICE instead), which was rejected. Recent news confirms Rep. Ruiz (D-Shawnee) attempted to amend a Republican bill during the 2026 session to criticize ICE's jurisdiction and actions in Kansas, citing privacy violations, surveillance, and incidents like violent enforcement. The amendment was ruled not germane and failed, with the original bill passing on party lines.

Immigration enforcement prioritizes public safety and removal of violators, but civil liberties groups argue many practices (especially surveillance tech) erode privacy for everyone, not just immigrants. Immigrants contribute significantly to economies like Kansas agriculture, as you noted.

For personalized advice on encounters with ICE, resources like the ACLU's "Know Your Rights" guides recommend remaining silent, not opening doors without a judicial warrant, and consulting an attorney.

Henry McClure  
785.383.9994
sent from mobile 📱
time kills deals

Karen in waiting

**Summary of the Press Release and Incident**

Christy Davis, a Democratic candidate for U.S. Senate in Kansas challenging incumbent Republican Sen. Roger Marshall in the 2026 election, issued a statement condemning a fatal shooting by a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent in Minneapolis on January 7, 2026. The victim was 37-year-old Renee Nicole Good (also referred to as Renee Nicole Macklin Good), a U.S. citizen, poet, writer, mother of three, and resident of Minneapolis. Good had previous ties to Kansas City, Missouri, where she lived before relocating (including a period in Canada after the 2024 election).

**Key Details of the Incident**  

Good was shot and killed inside her vehicle during an encounter with ICE agents amid a federal immigration enforcement operation (part of a broader nationwide crackdown under the Trump administration). Federal officials, including DHS and ICE, described the shooting as self-defense, claiming Good attempted to use her vehicle as a weapon to run over an agent (Jonathan Ross, an Iraq War veteran and ICE officer). However, Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey publicly disputed this, stating that video evidence "directly contradicts" the federal account and calling the narrative "bullshit," while urging ICE to leave the city. Minnesota officials, including Gov. Tim Walz, also contested the self-defense claim. Eyewitness accounts and media reports (including video analyses) suggest Good may have been acting as a community observer or legal observer (using whistles to alert neighbors), not as a protester or aggressor. She was not described as an activist by family and friends, who portrayed her as a devoted Christian, poet, and caregiver.

The shooting sparked widespread protests, vigils, and outrage across the U.S., including in Kansas City (where Good had connections), with calls to abolish or reform ICE. It was part of a pattern of ICE use-of-force incidents since late 2025. The FBI is investigating, but some reports indicate limited state involvement, and the Department of Justice has stated it is not pursuing its own probe. Federal accounts have been defended by Trump administration figures, while Democrats (including congressional leaders) have demanded independent investigations.

**Davis's Statement**  

In her press release from Topeka, Davis called for:  

- An immediate independent investigation (expressing distrust in the current administration).  

- Accountability to prevent future "tragic, senseless deaths" linked to "reckless agents" and "violent rhetoric from the White House."  

- Removal of the involved agent from duty pending investigation.  

- Congressional oversight hearings on ICE's rules of engagement and use of force, especially around protesters/observers.  

She criticized Republican-led House efforts for stalling oversight and urged Sen. Marshall to join Kansans in demanding answers, transparency, de-escalation, and accountability—warning that unchecked federal actions set dangerous precedents for communities, including in Kansas.

This appears to be a real campaign statement from Davis, leveraging the incident (and Good's Kansas City ties) to highlight issues of federal overreach, public safety, and immigration enforcement under the current administration. The event has fueled national debate on ICE tactics, with polarized narratives between federal defenses and local/state criticisms.

Henry McClure  
785.383.9994
sent from mobile 📱
time kills deals

Save?

Elon Musk just dropped a bombshell on the Moonshots with Peter Diamandis podcast that's got everyone talking.

Forget stressing about your 401(k) or building a big retirement nest egg. According to the Tesla and SpaceX CEO, saving for the distant future might be pointless because of the massive wave of AI and robotics he calls a "supersonic tsunami."

Musk predicts that by 2030, there will be more humanoid robots than people on Earth. These machines—think Tesla's Optimus—will take over traditional jobs, driving productivity through the roof.

The result? Humanity reaches a level of abundance that's hard to even imagine right now. No more scarcity. 

Everyone gets what he describes as a "universal you-can-have-whatever-you-want income"—way beyond basic needs, where goods, services, and even top-tier medical care become essentially free and unlimited.

It's a bold flip on what most financial experts preach. Musk says in 10-20 years, the old rules of money and work just won't apply anymore.

Of course, this vision comes with huge questions about how we get there, but it's classic Elon—pushing us to rethink everything.

Wild future ahead... or total game-changer? Either way, it's hard to look at your savings the same.

Henry McClure  
785.383.9994
sent from mobile 📱
time kills deals

Go Jerry

Sen. Moran Secures Federal Resources for KU Cancer Center in FY2026 Appropriations Package

This funding will be used to complete the construction of the cancer center

 

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Jerry Moran (R-Kan.) – chairman of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice and Science (CJS) – secured $36 million in funding for The University of Kansas Cancer Center to complete construction on the new cancer center. This funding was approved by Congress as part of a three-bill appropriations package and now goes to the President's desk to be signed into law.

 

"The University of Kansas Cancer Center is a nationally recognized leader in the fight against cancer," said Sen. Moran. "With these federal resources, The University of Kansas Cancer Center will be able to complete construction on this new, state-of-the-art cancer center and bring us closer to opening its doors for groundbreaking cancer research. This facility will expand the cancer services and research provided in Kansas and across the Midwest, saving lives and bringing us closer to finding a cure for cancer."

"Today marks another milestone in our effort to strengthen the KU Cancer Center's status among the best cancer centers in the nation," said Douglas Girod, University of Kansas Chancellor. "Thanks to Senator Moran's advocacy and efforts to secure this latest round of federal support, KU and its partners now have all the funding needed for construction of our new KU Cancer Center facility, which will enable us to further integrate research and clinical care to benefit patients fighting cancer. We are beyond grateful to Senator Moran for his commitment to the KU Cancer Center over the past two decades, and we look forward to continuing to work with him on initiatives that benefit Kansas patients, families and communities."

 

As the Chairman of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, and Science (CJS) and a senior member of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health & Human Services, and Education (LHHS), Sen. Moran has helped secure $105 million in federal resources since 2022 to build and equip the new facility. In May 2025, Sen. Moran participated in the groundbreaking ceremony for the new cancer center, which will bring expanded cancer care and research together in one place. Patients will have access to more innovative clinical trials and groundbreaking therapies developed on site.

Sen. Moran has requested additional funding for The University of Kansas Health System in the LHHS FY2026 Appropriations bill to purchase equipment for the cancer center. This legislation is expected to be considered by the House as soon as next week and will then be considered by the Senate.

 

Items to note:

    Sen. Moran has brought federal government leaders to the KU Cancer Center with the goal of showcasing the capabilities of its state-of-the-art facility, advocating for the importance of the center's role in the region and helping to strengthen relationships with national cancer research partners.

        Nov. 2025: Sen. Moran hosted National Institutes of Health (NIH) Director Dr. Jay Bhattacharya for a tour of The University of Kansas Medical Center, The University of Kansas Health System and cancer and Alzheimer's research labs. The tour also included a site visit of the progress on construction of the new cancer center building.

        July 2024: Sen. Moran hosted National Cancer Institute (NCI) then Director, Dr. Kimryn Rathmell, at the KU Cancer Center.

        June 2023: Sen. Moran brought National Institutes of Health (NIH) then Acting Director, Dr. Lawrence Tabak, to Kansas to see firsthand the progress of the construction of KU Cancer Center's new building.

    Sen. Moran has worked to bring federal recognition to the work being done at KU Cancer Center, including advocating for the facility to be awarded the NCI's most prestigious designation: Comprehensive Status.

Henry McClure  
785.383.9994
sent from mobile 📱
time kills deals