Returning 'POWER' to the PEOPLE.

Returning 'THE RULE OF LAW' to OUR LAND.

WE STAND TOGETHER.

WE STAND TOGETHER AS PATRIOTS. Q  Why haven’t Walz and Frey been arrested?

Because policy disputes are not crimes—and intent is extraordinarily hard to prove. Under U.S. law, no one can be arrested without a specific criminal charge, probable cause, and a court-issued warrant. Disagreeing with federal policy, criticizing ICE operations, or advocating different local priorities does not come close to meeting that standard.  Governors and mayors are not legally obligated to enforce federal immigration laws. The Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that the federal government cannot compel state or local officials to carry out federal enforcement. Minnesota’s limits on cooperation with ICE may be controversial, but they are lawful policy choices—not criminal acts.  Claims that Walz or Frey “incited violence” collapse on the central legal hurdle: intent. Criminal incitement requires proof that a speaker deliberately intended to provoke imminent lawless action and directly encouraged it. That is an extremely high bar by design.  Heated rhetoric, sharp criticism of federal agents, or statements made before unrest occurs do not meet that standard.  To prove criminal intent, prosecutors would need concrete evidence—explicit directives to commit crimes, private communications coordinating unlawful acts, or direct calls for immediate violence. Without that kind of proof, the law treats the speech as protected political expression.  This is the reality many people dislike, but it is the law.  This is where most accusations fail. It may be easy to argue that a leader was reckless, irresponsible, or inflammatory. It is far harder to prove that they intended criminal acts to occur.

“They should have known this might happen” is not the same as “they meant for it to happen.”

Courts require the second—and proving it is exceptionally difficult.  Arresting political leaders over policy disagreements or harsh rhetoric would violate the First Amendment and the separation of powers. The system addresses bad leadership through lawsuits, elections, and legislative action—not arrests.  Bottom line:

Walz and Frey have not been arrested because they have not committed a chargeable crime. Criticizing federal actions is protected speech, and lawful policy decisions are not criminal offenses. Without clear, demonstrable proof of criminal intent—proof that almost never exists—there is no legal basis for handcuffs.  We may not like that standard, but it is what it is. The Rule of Law takes priority—period.

Returning THE RULE OF LAW to our land means applying the law fairly and consistently, even when emotions run high. As citizens and patriots, we stand together on that principle above all.  WE STAND TOGETHER.

WE STAND TOGETHER AS PATRIOTS.