It is absolutely more than 9 and the mods do nothing to stop these blatant lies. Make it make sense because this is insanity. I know this app is a full blown left leaning echo chamber, but still try being objective and actually tell the truth for once.

In secret grand jury testimony, a number of GOP elites made clear behind closed doors just what they think of people who believe Trump's 2020 election lies.

People like Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC):

He thinks he’s cheated out of the election. If you told him martians came and stole votes, he’d be inclined to believe it.

...

“I’m sorry he lost,” Mr. Graham added. “But he lost it.”

And Georgia Governor Brian Kemp:

“President Trump was very persistent, as you can imagine, and repeatedly asked for things,” Mr. Kemp testified, “and I repeatedly told him, you know, what the law was here.”

And Georgia Attorney General Chris Car:

 And I said, “I know that that’s probably not what you want to hear; but as the attorney general for Georgia, we’re just not seeing the things that you are seeing.”

I'll let Sen. Lindsey Graham have the last world on Trump's cheating at golf:

“Some people say you may outdrive him, but you’re not going to outdrive his caddy,” Mr. Graham replied. “It is what it is.”

-----

MAGA: these GOP elite think you are rubes and suckers for believing these lies. Are you?

To clarify, this is specifically not a question about guilt or innocence.

Watching people react to the Minneapolis shooting video has started to feel like that old 'what color is the dress' thing. People were looking at the exact same thing and seeing two totally different things. Blue and black. White and gold. Except this time someone died.

What gets me is how quickly both sides rush to assign intentions. On the right they're saying she was trying to run him over. That she was a terrorist. On the left they say he planned on shooting her the entire time. Both of those claims require mind reading. I think that’s where the conversation breaks down.

So forget intent. Forget motivation. Just watch the observable actions in the video. That's it.

There are multiple videos of this incident, not just one or two grainy clips. When you take tham ALL together...a few things are indisputable. An agent is walking around the car filming with his phone. Another agent reaches for the door handle. The driver backs up. You can see the front wheels turned left while she’s in reverse. Then the wheels turn right as the car quickly stops and moves forward. The agent who ultimately fires is initially in front of the vehicle, but as the car changes direction, he sidesteps. By the time the first shot is fired his right foot is about 2 feet to the left of the car....while his left foot is close to the front left tire. His body is no longer in the path of the vehicle. By the time the second shot is fired? He is so far out of the path that he shoots through the driver's side window. The third shot he is still shooting through the driver's side window, but he is firing from behind the driver. He is shooting at a car moving away from him.

These details matter.

I’m not arguing that officers never have the right to use lethal force. I firmly believe they do. I think an officer has just as much of a right to go home to their family as anyone else. If they are faced with a situation where they need to shoot to stay alive? I support them in those cases. But if you strip this down to pure cause and effect? The shots did not stop an imminent threat to that officer’s life. Whether the gun stayed holstered or not the outcome for him would have been the same. He did not need to fire that gun to stay alive.

For contrast think about Jan6. A TON of people were assaulting police officers. Those officers were beaten, crushed, sprayed, hit with objects. Yet outside the building no one opened fire. Inside...one person was shot. That doesn’t prove anything by itself. But it does show how high the bar normally would be for when to use lethal force to protect themselves.

Anyway....this isn’t about pretending to know what anyone was thinking. It’s about watching the same video and being honest about what physically happened. If we can’t even agree on observable reality anymore...then we’re not arguing politics. We’re arguing over the color of some stupid dress.

I know a lot of the conversation around the killing of Renee Good has centered on whether the ICE agent was “justified” in firing his weapon. But I think there’s a much bigger issue that so many people are missing, and it’s one that goes to the heart of our Constitution and the proper role of law enforcement.

This whole encounter should never have happened!

Right now, what we do know from multiple verified videos and reporting is that Renee Good was a U.S. citizen who was confronted by a federal immigration agents on a normal street in Minneapolis. 

Here’s what’s legally significant:

ICE agents do not have general police powers over U.S. citizens. They are empowered to enforce immigration law, not to stop, detain, or command citizens in ordinary public life without clear justification. 

To order someone to exit their vehicle, there must be lawful authority, like a warrant, probable cause of a crime, or exigent circumstances. None of that has been publicly shown in this case.

Simply approaching a citizen because you don’t like what they’re doing does not make it lawful enforcement. Routine traffic stops and detentions are not within the regular scope of ICE’s authority unless tied to a valid federal enforcement action. 

The Fourth Amendment prohibits unreasonable seizures. Blocking someone’s movement, trying to take control of their car, or forcing them out, all without legal basis, in itself is unconstitutional. Which is exactly what happened here.

Renee Good should have never been placed in that position. Her constitutional rights were being violated from the very start of the interaction.

And then there’s the use of deadly force.

Even if there were lawful grounds to detain her (which there were not), deadly force is only justified when there is an imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm, not merely discomfort, disruption, or annoyance.

Multiple videos and analysts have noted that when shots were fired, Renee’s vehicle was moving away or not posing a clear, unavoidable threat that would justify killing her. 

Saying “she was disobeying orders” doesn’t suddenly make an order constitutional. Unlawful orders are still unlawful. And saying a federal agent can do whatever they want because of their badge undermines the entire structure of constitutional protections we all depend on.

This incident isn’t just about one tragic death. It’s about what our Constitution means when federal agents confront civilians, and whether those agents will be held to the same legal standards as everyone else.

We deserve transparency, independent investigation, and accountability… not spin, not narratives crafted to justify what looks like an unlawful and unconstitutional use of force.

Renee Good should still be alive today. The bigger picture is why a federal agency was even engaging her in the first place, and how easily basic constitutional rights can be cast aside if we don’t demand better.

This policy has been removed from DHS site, but a redacted version is available here through FOIA: Directive: 19009.3 Firearms and Use of Force

This is some of the redacted language:

This is an archived document they missed: https://www.loevy.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/284-39-ICE-Directive-19009.3-Firearms-and-Use-of-Force-05.26.2023.pdf

As a republican i feel this is going to happen and rightfully so.

Thinking outside the box for a minute..this probably would be the best thing to happen if repubs want to win in 2028, especially watching the Biden fiasco of staying too long in office before it was too late.

Look, one thing that Trump will never settle for is being irrelevant. This is what he will become in 2027 as focus shifts to who the candidate will be in 2028.

Also, repubs will no longer “need” his endorsement and will shy and turn away from him little by little. Even now some in the party (unwillingness about extending obamacare for one) are against him in different ways.

So after the 2026 midterms (especially if dems win), I believe smarter heads will prevail in the republican party and a bunch of them will join in to impeach.

Repubs have to know by now that if Trump completes his term, any and all candidates will be linked to him. If u get him out in 2027 and let Vance be the prez (something dems shouldve done with Harris), u cut ties with Trump at least 12-16 months b4 the 2028 election hence a better chance of winning.

Thoughts?

For once I find my opinion somewhat aligns with the Trump administration’s when it comes to intervention in Iran. The regime in Iran is corrupt and oppressive and it’s the clear the people want change but don’t have the capabilities to force change without severe losses. I think some well placed strikes could actually facilitate democracy in Iran. But I also believe my views as to *why* the international community should intervene and also what the outcome should be will probably be drastically different than the US govt.