Close Menu
FSNN | Free Speech News NetworkFSNN | Free Speech News Network
  • Home
  • News
    • Politics
    • Legal & Courts
    • Tech & Big Tech
    • Campus & Education
    • Media & Culture
    • Global Free Speech
  • Opinions
    • Debates
  • Video/Live
  • Community
  • Freedom Index
  • About
    • Mission
    • Contact
    • Support
Trending

In China and Hong Kong, remembrance is a crime

50 seconds ago

Texas and Florida Step Back from ALPRs

4 minutes ago

Why the Right Is Embracing State Power

7 minutes ago
Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
Facebook X (Twitter) Discord Telegram
FSNN | Free Speech News NetworkFSNN | Free Speech News Network
Market Data Newsletter
Wednesday, September 2
  • Home
  • News
    • Politics
    • Legal & Courts
    • Tech & Big Tech
    • Campus & Education
    • Media & Culture
    • Global Free Speech
  • Opinions
    • Debates
  • Video/Live
  • Community
  • Freedom Index
  • About
    • Mission
    • Contact
    • Support
FSNN | Free Speech News NetworkFSNN | Free Speech News Network
Home»News»Media & Culture»Homeland Security Won’t Stop Lying About Who Immigration Enforcers Are Arresting
Media & Culture

Homeland Security Won’t Stop Lying About Who Immigration Enforcers Are Arresting

News RoomBy News Room10 months agoNo Comments7 Mins Read7 Views
Share Facebook Twitter Pinterest Copy Link LinkedIn Tumblr Email VKontakte Telegram
Homeland Security Won’t Stop Lying About Who Immigration Enforcers Are Arresting
Share
Facebook Twitter Pinterest Email Copy Link

Listen to the article

0:00
0:00

Key Takeaways

Playback Speed

Select a Voice

If you’ve spent any time reading the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) public statements lately, you’ve probably gotten a strong whiff of what Tennessee Williams once called the “powerful and obnoxious odor of mendacity.”

Of course, all governments since time immemorial have lied, but it’s been hard not to notice, especially for reporters, the decline in reliable information being released by the federal government, particularly the DHS Office of Public Affairs, which is responsible for distributing public information about the Trump administration’s mass deportation program.

“I’ve been a reporter for over a decade, and I’ve never had government officials respond to emails in the way that they have since President Trump took power this past January,” Gizmodo reporter Matt Novak wrote recently.

I’ve been pestering federal agencies in Washington, D.C., since 2011 and noticed the same thing. It’s not just the tone (such as responding “your mom” to press inquiries), but a willingness to put false information out to the public and never correct it.

When I email DHS for comment about things like the detention of U.S. citizens, I’m given statements contradicted by clear evidence. Worse, these lies attack the reputations of other people, many of them with pending claims of government misconduct.

For example, on October 10, I wrote a brief story on the arrest of Debbie Brockman, a producer at WGN-TV, by Customs and Border Protection officers in Chicago. Video showed officers pinning Brockman to the ground and handcuffing her.

In an emailed statement attributed to DHS Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs Tricia McLaughlin, DHS’ Public Affairs Office wrote:

U.S. Border Patrol was conducting immigration enforcement operations and when several violent agitators used their vehicles to block in agents in an effort to impede and assault federal officers. In fear of public safety and of law enforcement, officers used their service vehicle to strike a suspect’s vehicle and create an opening. As agents were driving, Deborah Brockman, a U.S. citizen, threw objects at Border Patrol’s car and she was placed under arrest for assault on a federal law enforcement officer.

However, in bystander videos of the incident, Brockman was already detained in the agents’ van when it drove off and struck another vehicle. I emailed DHS twice asking if it wanted to clarify its statement in light of the video, as well as the fact that Brockman was released without charges. DHS did not respond.

Nevertheless, Border Patrol Commander at Large Gregory Bovino posted about the arrest on X a day later, along with a picture of Brockman: “This employee of a local television network decided to take the news cycle to a whole new level by throwing an object at Border Patrol Agents conducting lawful duties. Reporting now shifts to a different narrative; one of assault on a Federal officer…a serious felony.”

Attorneys representing Brockman issued a press release disputing the government’s account. They “adamantly deny any allegation that she assaulted anyone” and say that Brockman was simply walking to the bus stop when she was “violently assaulted by federal agents.”

Brockman’s attorneys say she was detained for roughly seven hours before being released. She has not been charged with a crime. DHS did not respond to an additional follow-up for this story.

DHS made similar unfounded statements in the hours after the October 4 shooting of Marimar Martinez, a 30-year-old U.S. citizen who was shot several times after allegedly ramming a Border Patrol vehicle. In a statement, DHS claimed that agents were “boxed in by 10 cars” when Martinez’s vehicle “rammed” their car. The statement also said Martinez was armed with a “semi-automatic weapon.”

“Law enforcement was forced to deploy their weapons and fired defensive shots at an armed US citizen who drove herself to the hospital to get care for wounds,” the statement continued.

However, Martinez’s lawyer says bodycam footage contradicts the claim that she threatened officers with her vehicle, and told the Chicago Sun-Times that body camera shows that an agent said, “Do something, bitch,” before shooting her. Martinez also was taken to the hospital by ambulance, and the criminal complaint against her only mentions two cars, not 10.

The criminal complaint also doesn’t mention a gun. FOX 32 Chicago reported that police audio confirmed Martinez had a concealed carry permit for a gun, which remained in her purse throughout the incident.

Sen. Chris Murphy (D–Conn.) sent a letter on October 16 to DHS Secretary Kristi Noem asking for answers about the numerous contradictions between DHS’ narrative and the emerging facts about Martinez’s shooting.

“When the government misrepresents or lies about events involving the safety and wellbeing of federal law enforcement, it erodes public trust, making their jobs much harder,” Murphy wrote.

As Greg Sargent wrote at The New Republic, DHS is poisoning the public information surrounding government violence: “While the criminal justice process might prove illuminating on this incident, DHS may never correct its falsehoods about it or divulge anything to Congress shedding light on what really happened.”

This is happening across the country in case after case. On October 1, I reported on a lawsuit filed by Leo Garcia Venegas, a U.S. citizen who was detained twice during construction site raids in Alabama, despite having a valid state ID on him.

When I asked the DHS Public Affairs Office about the lawsuit, it sent a statement attributed to McLaughlin:

Allegations that DHS law enforcement officers engage in “racial profiling” are disgusting, reckless, and categorically FALSE. What makes someone a target for immigration enforcement is if they are illegally in the U.S.—NOT their skin color, race, or ethnicity. Under the fourth amendment of the U.S. Constitution, DHS law enforcement uses “reasonable suspicion” to make arrests. There are no “indiscriminate stops” being made. The Supreme Court recently vindicated us on this question. DHS enforces federal immigration law without fear, favor, or prejudice.

This type of garbage is directly contributing to ICE officers facing a 1000% increase in assaults against them, as well as months of repeated attacks on ICE facilities like the fatal one in Dallas. Race-baiting opportunism in the form of a baseless lawsuit is no better than when it comes from politicians or activists.

I followed up by asking why, then, was Venegas targeted and detained twice if he was a U.S. citizen? What reasonable suspicion did officers have that he was in the country illegally? DHS did not respond.

(I didn’t notice at the moment, but DHS’ statement is also incorrect as a matter of law. The legal standard for an arrest is probable cause, not reasonable suspicion.) 

ProPublica reported last week that it had found 170 U.S. citizens who had been detained by federal immigration officers since Trump’s mass deportation blitz began. Some of them were pepper-sprayed and assaulted, and others were held in detention for days before being released.

The examples go on. After a video of a Chicago-area teenager being violently arrested went viral earlier this month, McLaughlin wrote on X that the video was “from a year ago” and that the agents involved weren’t ICE. Both claims were false.

McLaughlin also recently claimed that a 13-year-old boy detained by ICE in Massachusetts was in possession of a knife and gun. However, the town’s mayor confirmed during a press conference the next day that “no guns were found” during the boy’s arrest.

It matters when the government lies, because a democratic government that destroys the presumption that it’s accountable for its actions will soon either stop being democratic or stop being a government.

Read the full article here

Fact Checker

Verify the accuracy of this article using AI-powered analysis and real-time sources.

Get Your Fact Check Report

Enter your email to receive detailed fact-checking analysis

5 free reports remaining

Continue with Full Access

You've used your 5 free reports. Sign up for unlimited access!

Already have an account? Sign in here

Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Email Telegram Copy Link
News Room
  • Website
  • Facebook
  • X (Twitter)
  • Instagram
  • LinkedIn

The FSNN News Room is the voice of our in-house journalists, editors, and researchers. We deliver timely, unbiased reporting at the crossroads of finance, cryptocurrency, and global politics, providing clear, fact-driven analysis free from agendas.

Related Articles

Media & Culture

Why the Right Is Embracing State Power

7 minutes ago
Cryptocurrency & Free Speech Finance

OpenAI’s Astra Becomes Its First AI Model With ‘Critical’ Hacking Abilities

43 minutes ago
Media & Culture

Invasion of the Robot Teachers

1 hour ago
Cryptocurrency & Free Speech Finance

Tether Sued Over Alleged Unlawful Freeze of $42.4 Million in USDT

2 hours ago
Media & Culture

Wisconsin Cops Used Flock Over 100 Times To Track a Navy Veteran After He Lawfully Recorded a Traffic Stop

2 hours ago
Cryptocurrency & Free Speech Finance

Norway Moves to Regulate ‘Pervert Glasses,’ Weighs Facial Recognition Ban

3 hours ago
Add A Comment

Comments are closed.

Editors Picks

Texas and Florida Step Back from ALPRs

4 minutes ago

Why the Right Is Embracing State Power

7 minutes ago

Joshua Wong has spent more than 2,000 consecutive days behind bars More than a decade ago, Hong Kong watched a bespectacled teenager emerge from a student movement and become one of the most recognisable voices of his generation. Joshua Wong was barely old enough to vote when much of the world learned his name. He devoted his adolescence and then his twenties to arguing that Hong Kong people should have a say in their own future. Today, he is 29. He has spent more than 2,000 consecutive days behind bars. And after pleading guilty to another national security charge, he once again doesn’t know when – or whether –he will be free. I met Joshua in 2013, when he was 16 and I was 14. He had recently helped lead a student movement opposing the Hong Kong government’s attempt to introduce Chinese nationalist education into our schools. He was sharp, stubborn, and unapologetic. Most importantly to those of us who were younger, he seemed entirely unconvinced by the idea that being young meant we should remain quiet. Joshua Wong speaks to US congressmen in 2019 Joshua believed we had every right to speak about the future because it was our future too. He went on to become one of the student leaders of the 2014 Umbrella Movement and later co-founded Demosistō, a political party advocating self-determination for Hong Kong. Arrests, court appearances, and prison sentences gradually became part of his life. Then, in November 2020, Joshua entered prison and didn’t come home. The Hong Kong outside his cell has changed almost beyond recognition since then. Newspapers have been forced to close down. Civil society organisations and political groups have disbanded. Democracy activists have been imprisoned or driven into exile, like me. Books disappeared from shelves. People have deleted old social media posts, withdrawn from political life, and learned to choose their words more carefully. Hong Kong’s freedoms haven’t disappeared only through arrest and prosecutions. They’ve disappeared through the fear those prosecutions create. And slowly, Joshua himself has been made to disappear from everyday life. In January 2021, while already detained, he was arrested under the National Security Law for participating in an unofficial primary election held the previous year. He was eventually sentenced to four years and eight months in that case. He had been expected to complete his existing prison term in January 2027. But the authorities weren’t finished with him. In June 2025, while Joshua was still incarcerated, police arrested him again. This time, prosecutors accused him of conspiring to “collude with foreign forces” through international advocacy. He has now pleaded guilty to the charge. His sentencing remains ahead of him, and in cases deemed sufficiently grave, the offence can carry life imprisonment. It would be easy to regard this as simply another prosecution of a prominent Hong Kong democracy activist. That would miss the larger point. Joshua’s case matters not only because the authorities have deprived one man of his freedom. It matters because of what his prosecution tells everyone who once exercised the freedoms Hong Kong was supposed to protect. The prosecution has reached back into Joshua’s public life: his speeches, media interviews, campaigns, social media posts, and meetings with foreign politicians – all before the NSL existed – and presented them as the background to the charge. These weren’t secret acts. They were part of Hong Kong’s public political life. Joshua spoke openly. He met politicians openly. He gave interviews openly. He advocated internationally in full view of the government and the world. A society doesn’t have to formally outlaw every opinion to make people afraid to express one. All it has to do is demonstrate what might happen to those who speak too loudly. This is what makes Joshua’s prosecution bigger than Joshua. The authorities don’t need to imprison every young Hong Konger who attended a protest, who campaigned for democracy, spoke to a journalist or posted on social media. They only need to make an example of someone everybody remembers doing so. They know this well. Joshua was proof to my generation that a teenager’s voice could matter. His imprisonment risks being turned into proof of the opposite: that speaking can follow you for years; that yesterday’s advocacy can become tomorrow’s evidence; and that even after one sentence ends, another can be waiting in the docks. This is how censorship moves beyond newspaper offices and political organisations and takes up residence in people’s minds. People learn to silence themselves, beating the authorities to the punch. For those of us who knew Joshua when we were kids, that transformation is particularly painful. We grew up believing that using our voices was an act of citizenship, and Joshua taught us that. Joshua’s case now poses another question for us: will we learn the lesson his jailers want to teach us – or will we remember the one Joshua taught us first. Frances Hui is the policy and advocacy manager at the Committee for Freedom in Hong Kong Foundation. READ MORE

23 minutes ago

New Jersey becomes first state to ask Supreme Court to weigh in on prediction markets

35 minutes ago
Latest Posts

Ondo Says US Rules Can Support Stock Perpetual Futures

40 minutes ago

OpenAI’s Astra Becomes Its First AI Model With ‘Critical’ Hacking Abilities

43 minutes ago

Invasion of the Robot Teachers

1 hour ago

Subscribe to News

Get the latest news and updates directly to your inbox.

At FSNN – Free Speech News Network, we deliver unfiltered reporting and in-depth analysis on the stories that matter most. From breaking headlines to global perspectives, our mission is to keep you informed, empowered, and connected.

FSNN.net is owned and operated by GlobalBoost Media
, an independent media organization dedicated to advancing transparency, free expression, and factual journalism across the digital landscape.

Facebook X (Twitter) Discord Telegram
Latest News

In China and Hong Kong, remembrance is a crime

50 seconds ago

Texas and Florida Step Back from ALPRs

4 minutes ago

Why the Right Is Embracing State Power

7 minutes ago

Subscribe to Updates

Get the latest news and updates directly to your inbox.

© 2026 GlobalBoost Media. All Rights Reserved.
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Our Authors
  • Contact

Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.

🍪

Cookies

We and our selected partners wish to use cookies to collect information about you for functional purposes and statistical marketing. You may not give us your consent for certain purposes by selecting an option and you can withdraw your consent at any time via the cookie icon.

Cookie Preferences

Manage Cookies

Cookies are small text that can be used by websites to make the user experience more efficient. The law states that we may store cookies on your device if they are strictly necessary for the operation of this site. For all other types of cookies, we need your permission. This site uses various types of cookies. Some cookies are placed by third party services that appear on our pages.

Your permission applies to the following domains:

  • https://fsnn.net
Necessary
Necessary cookies help make a website usable by enabling basic functions like page navigation and access to secure areas of the website. The website cannot function properly without these cookies.
Statistic
Statistic cookies help website owners to understand how visitors interact with websites by collecting and reporting information anonymously.
Preferences
Preference cookies enable a website to remember information that changes the way the website behaves or looks, like your preferred language or the region that you are in.
Marketing
Marketing cookies are used to track visitors across websites. The intention is to display ads that are relevant and engaging for the individual user and thereby more valuable for publishers and third party advertisers.