When a reporter asked Trump on Thursday evening whether or not he would be drawing back in Minneapolis, he responded: ā€œWell, we want to keep our country safe. We’ll do whatever we can to keep our country safe.ā€

ā€œSo, not pulling back?ā€ the reporter asked.

ā€œNo, no, not at all,ā€ the president said.

This stands in stark contrast to what his administration has said this week.

After federal agents killed ICU nurse Alex Pretti on Saturday, Senate Democrats had threatened a government shutdown over the inclusion of Department of Homeland Security (DHS) funding and, within it, a historic increase to Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) budget.

Seemingly in response, the Trump administration scrambled to claw back some of its messaging.

The White House reneged on top officials’ comments calling Pretti an ā€œassassinā€ and ā€œterrorist,ā€ and the administration booted Border Patrol official Gregory Bovino from his position overseeing the raid in Minneapolis. The new chief of Operation Metro Surge, ā€œborder czarā€ Tom Homan, assured the media that the operation was going to ā€œdraw down.ā€ Trump himself said on Tuesday that ā€œwe’re going to deescalate a little bitā€ in Minneapolis.

And, for good measure, Trump administration insiders leaked some stories to the media about turmoil within Trump’s cabinet about immigration policy.

Just hours after Trump and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-New York) announced that they had reached a deal to avert a shutdown, however, Trump changed his tune. That deal, which would give DHS two weeks of funding to operate while negotiations are ongoing, was announced Thursday afternoon.

Trump’s comments lend credence to critics who said that the administration was only posturing about deescalating while never planning to do so.

The Senate still hasn’t passed the funding package due to some Republican holdouts. However, other Republicans have framed the negotiations as a win — and critics have slammed the deal as one that disproportionately benefits Trump.

The threat of a government shutdown was a major leverage point for Democrats. It would begin this weekend, just a week after federal agents’ killing of Alex Pretti in Minneapolis, giving Democrats power over Republicans to extract concessions on the Trump administration’s ICE operation.

Trump was desperate to avoid it — especially after his party shouldered much of the blame for the historically long shutdown last year. In a post on Truth Social on Thursday evening, he lauded the package.

Meanwhile, critics have slammed Schumer for the deal, which only buys Republicans time to distance themselves from the Pretti killing and continue the administration’s raids in Minneapolis and other cities unhindered.

ā€œLeader Schumer should ask the Minnesotans who are watching their neighbors get killed in cold blood if a deal with no plan to stop ICE is enough right now,ā€ said MoveOn Civic Action.

  • Bamboodpanda@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    4
    Ā·
    7 hours ago

    This argument persists because it is easier to believe that everything is rigged than to engage with the complexity of political institutions. It provides an emotionally satisfying shortcut, but it collapses under even a minimal amount of empirical scrutiny.

    • WoodScientist@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      Ā·
      7 hours ago

      Dude. The heads of both parties are all over the Epstein files. They all hang out in the same social circles. It’s a big club, and you’re not in it.

      • zbyte64@awful.systems
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        Ā·
        7 hours ago

        The last two Democrat presidents aren’t on that list. And yet they sat on that intel and let the GOP take power. Bizarre.

    • MadBits@europe.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      Ā·
      7 hours ago

      I really do not agree with this statement. I think their actions speak for themselves and it’s quite easy to see through that.

    • StupidBrotherInLaw@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      Ā·
      7 hours ago

      In the article, the minority party is described giving up a strong bargaining lever in exchange for vague promises with no guarantee of follow through. Again.

      Controlled opposition. The rest of the world sees it. Why not Americans?