Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

🚨BREAKING: Another ICE agent has been caught on video illegally pointing a firearm at a U.S. citizen, in Lemonwood, California. In the video, an unmarked ICE vehicle is stopped in the middle of the road… no vehicles are in front of it, and nothing is preventing them from driving...

TheJFreakinC's profile picture

Jesus Freakin Congress

59,477 subscribers

231,985 views • 2 months ago •via X (Twitter)

News & PoliticsHealth & WellnessEducation
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

🚨An ICE agent accused a U.S. citizen of “impeding” because she refused to drive her car into another vehicle. In the video, an ICE agent yells at a woman, in her car, to move. She explains that she can’t move because she will hit another vehicle. She isn’t refusing… or trying to block them… she is trying to avoid committing a crime. “I’m not impeding. I’m trying to get out of the fucking way. You see how narrow it is.” The agent then tells her to back up. Her response… “You are endangering me. Get out of my way so I can back up. I’m going to hit this car.” And this is exactly why it is so dangerous when ICE agents claim someone was “weaponizing their vehicle.” Because we keep seeing the same problem… ICE agents create chaotic situations by blocking roads, surrounding vehicles, and giving conflicting commands. Then, when someone tries to navigate that chaos, they claim they were being attacked. When the government creates the danger, everyone else is left to deal with the consequences.
0:19

🚨An ICE agent accused a U.S. citizen of “impeding” because she refused to drive her car into another vehicle. In the video, an ICE agent yells at a woman, in her car, to move. She explains that she can’t move because she will hit another vehicle. She isn’t refusing… or trying to block them… she is trying to avoid committing a crime. “I’m not impeding. I’m trying to get out of the fucking way. You see how narrow it is.” The agent then tells her to back up. Her response… “You are endangering me. Get out of my way so I can back up. I’m going to hit this car.” And this is exactly why it is so dangerous when ICE agents claim someone was “weaponizing their vehicle.” Because we keep seeing the same problem… ICE agents create chaotic situations by blocking roads, surrounding vehicles, and giving conflicting commands. Then, when someone tries to navigate that chaos, they claim they were being attacked. When the government creates the danger, everyone else is left to deal with the consequences.

Jesus Freakin Congress

326,738 views • 1 month ago

In the United States, law enforcement officers are authorized to use deadly force, including shooting at a suspect, when they have a reasonable belief that there is an imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm to themselves or others, as established by Supreme Court precedents like Graham v. Connor (1989), which evaluates use of force based on objective reasonableness under the circumstances. In scenarios where a suspect attempts to run over an officer with a vehicle, the vehicle is treated as a deadly weapon posing such a threat, making the use of deadly force, including firing at the driver to neutralize it generally justifiable. This standard has been upheld in various court cases. This includes the use of deadly force when the perpetrator is deemed a threat to public safety. In Mullenix v. Luna (2015), an officer was granted qualified immunity for shooting at a fleeing vehicle from an overpass to prevent it from endangering others.
0:19

In the United States, law enforcement officers are authorized to use deadly force, including shooting at a suspect, when they have a reasonable belief that there is an imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm to themselves or others, as established by Supreme Court precedents like Graham v. Connor (1989), which evaluates use of force based on objective reasonableness under the circumstances. In scenarios where a suspect attempts to run over an officer with a vehicle, the vehicle is treated as a deadly weapon posing such a threat, making the use of deadly force, including firing at the driver to neutralize it generally justifiable. This standard has been upheld in various court cases. This includes the use of deadly force when the perpetrator is deemed a threat to public safety. In Mullenix v. Luna (2015), an officer was granted qualified immunity for shooting at a fleeing vehicle from an overpass to prevent it from endangering others.

Sovey

33,968 views • 7 months ago

🚨BREAKING: In New York, an ICE agent was caught on video walking across the street and pepper spraying a woman directly in the face… for film them. In the video, a woman is standing, with several other civilians, on the opposite side of the street. They aren’t blocking traffic, or interfering with an arrest. In fact, you can’t even see an arrest taking place. They’re simply standing there, filming ICE agents from a public place. Then, the ICE agent deliberately walks across the street, approaches the woman, raises his pepper spray canister just inches from her face, and sprays her directly in the eyes. People standing around her are seen running away to avoid getting sprayed, too Only AFTER spraying her do you hear the agent say, “Back up.” And then they turn around, like they didn’t just assault U.S. citizens with a chemical weapon, and walk away. This should piss off every American. The First Amendment protects your right to record law enforcement in public. Pepper spraying someone for peacefully recording… is retaliation. The Fourth Amendment also protects people from excessive force. Under the Constitution, officers can’t use force that isn’t objectively reasonable under the circumstances. If someone is standing on the other side of the street, posing no immediate threat, not resisting, and not interfering… it’s difficult to justify blasting them in the face with a chemical weapon. And even ICE’s own use-of-force standards require force to be reasonable, necessary, and proportional to the threat presented. Nothing in this video suggests that standard was met. This is exactly why people should be concerned about masked federal agents operating with little transparency, or accountability… If agents can walk up to U.S. citizens and assault them with a chemical weapon for recording… that means your constitutional rights exist at the discretion of whoever is holding the pepper spray. And that’s not how a constitutional republic is supposed to work.
0:17

🚨BREAKING: In New York, an ICE agent was caught on video walking across the street and pepper spraying a woman directly in the face… for film them. In the video, a woman is standing, with several other civilians, on the opposite side of the street. They aren’t blocking traffic, or interfering with an arrest. In fact, you can’t even see an arrest taking place. They’re simply standing there, filming ICE agents from a public place. Then, the ICE agent deliberately walks across the street, approaches the woman, raises his pepper spray canister just inches from her face, and sprays her directly in the eyes. People standing around her are seen running away to avoid getting sprayed, too Only AFTER spraying her do you hear the agent say, “Back up.” And then they turn around, like they didn’t just assault U.S. citizens with a chemical weapon, and walk away. This should piss off every American. The First Amendment protects your right to record law enforcement in public. Pepper spraying someone for peacefully recording… is retaliation. The Fourth Amendment also protects people from excessive force. Under the Constitution, officers can’t use force that isn’t objectively reasonable under the circumstances. If someone is standing on the other side of the street, posing no immediate threat, not resisting, and not interfering… it’s difficult to justify blasting them in the face with a chemical weapon. And even ICE’s own use-of-force standards require force to be reasonable, necessary, and proportional to the threat presented. Nothing in this video suggests that standard was met. This is exactly why people should be concerned about masked federal agents operating with little transparency, or accountability… If agents can walk up to U.S. citizens and assault them with a chemical weapon for recording… that means your constitutional rights exist at the discretion of whoever is holding the pepper spray. And that’s not how a constitutional republic is supposed to work.

Jesus Freakin Congress

578,818 views • 1 month ago

🚨BREAKING: ICE/Border Patrol agents are assaulting U.S. citizens on public sidewalks in Minneapolis. In the video, agents are walking down a public sidewalk. A man is standing there, doing nothing but existing in public space. He glances back, and an agent uses both hands to shove him off the sidewalk toward the street, then casually walks away. Moments later, another person is standing on the same sidewalk. An agent pushes them into the street, directly in front of a car, and continues across the crosswalk as if nothing happened. Let’s be clear about what this is. This is assault. This is use of force without legal justification. This is reckless endangerment, pushing people into traffic. This is deprivation of civil rights under color of law. This is law enforcement interfering with lawful use of public space without cause, orders, or any articulated threat. These are members of the community, on their own sidewalks, not blocking anyone, not threatening anyone, not committing a crime. ICE agents do not have the authority to clear sidewalks by force, and they absolutely do not have the authority to put civilians in danger because they feel entitled to the space. If any ordinary person shoved strangers into traffic, they’d be arrested on the spot. When federal agents do it, we’re told to look away. So ask yourself this: If armed federal agents can assault U.S. citizens for standing on a sidewalk, what exactly is left of the rule of law?
0:12

🚨BREAKING: ICE/Border Patrol agents are assaulting U.S. citizens on public sidewalks in Minneapolis. In the video, agents are walking down a public sidewalk. A man is standing there, doing nothing but existing in public space. He glances back, and an agent uses both hands to shove him off the sidewalk toward the street, then casually walks away. Moments later, another person is standing on the same sidewalk. An agent pushes them into the street, directly in front of a car, and continues across the crosswalk as if nothing happened. Let’s be clear about what this is. This is assault. This is use of force without legal justification. This is reckless endangerment, pushing people into traffic. This is deprivation of civil rights under color of law. This is law enforcement interfering with lawful use of public space without cause, orders, or any articulated threat. These are members of the community, on their own sidewalks, not blocking anyone, not threatening anyone, not committing a crime. ICE agents do not have the authority to clear sidewalks by force, and they absolutely do not have the authority to put civilians in danger because they feel entitled to the space. If any ordinary person shoved strangers into traffic, they’d be arrested on the spot. When federal agents do it, we’re told to look away. So ask yourself this: If armed federal agents can assault U.S. citizens for standing on a sidewalk, what exactly is left of the rule of law?

Jesus Freakin Congress

995,232 views • 7 months ago

INDIANAPOLIS—I found this video and everybody was race raging in the replies. ThE PoLiCe aRe GeNoCiDiNg uS!! 🙄 Here’s the context you are too stupid to research: Police received multiple calls that a man named Lemar Brandon Qualls was waving a gun around and pointing it at people in public. One call from a woman: ‘He has a gun. He has put it in front of my face, and he clanked it against a metal bar to let me know it's real.’ You can see the gun in his right hand in the video. Also, this is not Brandon’s porch. This is a complete strangers house. A woman’s. When police confronted Qualls, he pointed his gun at one of them. Qualls fucked around. Qualls found out. If your immediate emotional response to shit like this is based entirely around skin color and not consequences and accountability, you are not a serious person. Famous rapper Julio Foolio was just gunned down last night and none of you will bat an eye because his killer wasn’t white and this is business as usual.
0:15

INDIANAPOLIS—I found this video and everybody was race raging in the replies. ThE PoLiCe aRe GeNoCiDiNg uS!! 🙄 Here’s the context you are too stupid to research: Police received multiple calls that a man named Lemar Brandon Qualls was waving a gun around and pointing it at people in public. One call from a woman: ‘He has a gun. He has put it in front of my face, and he clanked it against a metal bar to let me know it's real.’ You can see the gun in his right hand in the video. Also, this is not Brandon’s porch. This is a complete strangers house. A woman’s. When police confronted Qualls, he pointed his gun at one of them. Qualls fucked around. Qualls found out. If your immediate emotional response to shit like this is based entirely around skin color and not consequences and accountability, you are not a serious person. Famous rapper Julio Foolio was just gunned down last night and none of you will bat an eye because his killer wasn’t white and this is business as usual.

Amiri King

5,430,073 views • 2 years ago

Remember when that Border Patrol agent pulled a gun on unarmed civilians… twice… in Evanston, IL, just outside Chicago? Well, now we have the footage… and we finally know what “provoked” him. You can clearly hear a woman say, “She is a citizen of the United States!” Another agent warns him that people are filming behind him. The agent turns, looks directly at the camera, and says, “Get back or I’ll shoot you.” The man filming, in shock, replies, “You’re going to what?!” And that’s when the agent actually pulls out his gun and points it straight at an unarmed man who’s just holding a phone. All because they were… filming. So, when Border Patrol claims this was “by the book,” just remember: their book apparently says you can point a gun at an unarmed citizen for daring to exercise their first amendment right to film you.
0:15

Remember when that Border Patrol agent pulled a gun on unarmed civilians… twice… in Evanston, IL, just outside Chicago? Well, now we have the footage… and we finally know what “provoked” him. You can clearly hear a woman say, “She is a citizen of the United States!” Another agent warns him that people are filming behind him. The agent turns, looks directly at the camera, and says, “Get back or I’ll shoot you.” The man filming, in shock, replies, “You’re going to what?!” And that’s when the agent actually pulls out his gun and points it straight at an unarmed man who’s just holding a phone. All because they were… filming. So, when Border Patrol claims this was “by the book,” just remember: their book apparently says you can point a gun at an unarmed citizen for daring to exercise their first amendment right to film you.

Jesus Freakin Congress

579,225 views • 9 months ago

🚨BREAKING: An ICE agent is caught on video threatening to murder a U.S. citizen for “raising his voice” to him, in Minnesota. In the video, a person is filming an ICE agent sitting in a car. The ICE agent points at him and says, “I will tell you this, brother… if you raise your voice, I will erase your voice.” The person filming clarifies, “If I raise my voice you will erase my voice?!?” The agent responds, “Exactly, yeah.” The person asks, “Are you serious?!?” And the agent replies, “Yep.” A federal agent openly threatened to murder a U.S. citizen for exercising his First Amendment right, ON CAMERA. This is what happens when agents are not held accountable for executing U.S. citizens, unlawfully detaining people, and violating the Constitution in broad daylight. You get agents who… Feel entitled to threaten illegal violence. Feel entitled to silence citizens for speaking up. Feel entitled to murder people who “disobey” them. And it’s only further proof that ALL of our constitutional rights are being erased right before our eyes.
0:15

🚨BREAKING: An ICE agent is caught on video threatening to murder a U.S. citizen for “raising his voice” to him, in Minnesota. In the video, a person is filming an ICE agent sitting in a car. The ICE agent points at him and says, “I will tell you this, brother… if you raise your voice, I will erase your voice.” The person filming clarifies, “If I raise my voice you will erase my voice?!?” The agent responds, “Exactly, yeah.” The person asks, “Are you serious?!?” And the agent replies, “Yep.” A federal agent openly threatened to murder a U.S. citizen for exercising his First Amendment right, ON CAMERA. This is what happens when agents are not held accountable for executing U.S. citizens, unlawfully detaining people, and violating the Constitution in broad daylight. You get agents who… Feel entitled to threaten illegal violence. Feel entitled to silence citizens for speaking up. Feel entitled to murder people who “disobey” them. And it’s only further proof that ALL of our constitutional rights are being erased right before our eyes.

Jesus Freakin Congress

297,686 views • 7 months ago

They started with 50. Now they say they’re 18,000 In 1996 there were fewer than 50 of them. Today, according to the organizers, up to 18,000 walked through Copenhagen. From Dronning Louises Bro to the Imam Ali Mosque. Look at the curve. This is how it happens. First a handful. Then a few hundred. Then it fills a bridge, a district, a capital. A little at a time, until it is no longer a little. And let me be fair, because fairness is the point. There is nothing strange about them holding this mourning procession. They have done it as part of their faith for more than a thousand years. It is theirs, and they believe in it. There is nothing strange about that at all. What should stop us is the other half. There is nothing strange about Europe allowing it either, and that is exactly the problem. Europe allows it because Europe has forgotten who it is. A people that remembers what it stands for does not need to ban anything, it simply knows where its own line runs. We have lost that. And so the issue was never them. The issue is us. Now look at what actually moved through the streets. Men in front. Women in the second row. That is not a detail, that is the whole point. It is a view of women set into a system and marched out into the public square, in a city where generations fought for women and men to stand as equals. The real question is not whether people may believe what they want. They may. The question is why our capital should cultivate a political law-religion that commemorates a 7th-century power struggle by dividing people by sex on Nørrebrogade. One of the organizers is the Imam Ali Mosque, repeatedly described as the Iranian regime’s extended arm in Denmark. The same regime that hangs women and young men from cranes. We are not importing culture. We are importing a system. And we let it grow, not because they are strong, but because we forgot why we were. First a little. Then a lot. Then too late.
0:10

They started with 50. Now they say they’re 18,000 In 1996 there were fewer than 50 of them. Today, according to the organizers, up to 18,000 walked through Copenhagen. From Dronning Louises Bro to the Imam Ali Mosque. Look at the curve. This is how it happens. First a handful. Then a few hundred. Then it fills a bridge, a district, a capital. A little at a time, until it is no longer a little. And let me be fair, because fairness is the point. There is nothing strange about them holding this mourning procession. They have done it as part of their faith for more than a thousand years. It is theirs, and they believe in it. There is nothing strange about that at all. What should stop us is the other half. There is nothing strange about Europe allowing it either, and that is exactly the problem. Europe allows it because Europe has forgotten who it is. A people that remembers what it stands for does not need to ban anything, it simply knows where its own line runs. We have lost that. And so the issue was never them. The issue is us. Now look at what actually moved through the streets. Men in front. Women in the second row. That is not a detail, that is the whole point. It is a view of women set into a system and marched out into the public square, in a city where generations fought for women and men to stand as equals. The real question is not whether people may believe what they want. They may. The question is why our capital should cultivate a political law-religion that commemorates a 7th-century power struggle by dividing people by sex on Nørrebrogade. One of the organizers is the Imam Ali Mosque, repeatedly described as the Iranian regime’s extended arm in Denmark. The same regime that hangs women and young men from cranes. We are not importing culture. We are importing a system. And we let it grow, not because they are strong, but because we forgot why we were. First a little. Then a lot. Then too late.

Krisztina Maria

38,814 views • 2 months ago

A driver caught on surveillance camera flying through an intersection in Murray Utah and the internet is going crazy trying to figure out who is at fault here - this is exactly the kind of reckless driving that turns a normal afternoon into a tragedy in a split second. Intersections are already one of the most dangerous spots on any road and when somebody decides the rules don’t apply to them everybody around them becomes a victim of that decision. Watch the video and drop your verdict in the comments.
0:12

A driver caught on surveillance camera flying through an intersection in Murray Utah and the internet is going crazy trying to figure out who is at fault here - this is exactly the kind of reckless driving that turns a normal afternoon into a tragedy in a split second. Intersections are already one of the most dangerous spots on any road and when somebody decides the rules don’t apply to them everybody around them becomes a victim of that decision. Watch the video and drop your verdict in the comments.

Tony Lane 🇺🇸

15,204 views • 2 months ago

🚨ICE agents are illegally stopping U.S. citizens and demanding they get out of their cars to “prove” their citizenship… in Shakopee, Minnesota. In the video, multiple unmarked agent vehicles have a man surrounded while they run his information through a federal database. A woman drives by, sees what’s happening, and asks the man his name. He answers her… and says he’s a U.S. citizen. And yet, he’s still being treated like he has to justify existing in his own community. And just to clarify… Agents cannot just stop someone, demand identification, and hold them while they “check” someone’s status without reasonable suspicion of a crime. Driving while being a POC is not reasonable suspicion. Federal agents do not get to turn neighborhoods into checkpoints because they feel like it. When armed agents surround someone, run them through a database, and force them to prove who they are without explaining why they’re being detained… that is a violation of their constitutional rights. Rights don’t hinge on whether an agent feels suspicious that day. When law enforcement believes the Constitution is optional, enforcement turns into intimidation. Stops turn into fishing expeditions. Detentions turn into threats. Databases turn into weapons. Power expands to the edge of whatever no one pushes back on. And once that line moves, it does not move back on its own. That’s what people should be paying attention to.
0:18

🚨ICE agents are illegally stopping U.S. citizens and demanding they get out of their cars to “prove” their citizenship… in Shakopee, Minnesota. In the video, multiple unmarked agent vehicles have a man surrounded while they run his information through a federal database. A woman drives by, sees what’s happening, and asks the man his name. He answers her… and says he’s a U.S. citizen. And yet, he’s still being treated like he has to justify existing in his own community. And just to clarify… Agents cannot just stop someone, demand identification, and hold them while they “check” someone’s status without reasonable suspicion of a crime. Driving while being a POC is not reasonable suspicion. Federal agents do not get to turn neighborhoods into checkpoints because they feel like it. When armed agents surround someone, run them through a database, and force them to prove who they are without explaining why they’re being detained… that is a violation of their constitutional rights. Rights don’t hinge on whether an agent feels suspicious that day. When law enforcement believes the Constitution is optional, enforcement turns into intimidation. Stops turn into fishing expeditions. Detentions turn into threats. Databases turn into weapons. Power expands to the edge of whatever no one pushes back on. And once that line moves, it does not move back on its own. That’s what people should be paying attention to.

Jesus Freakin Congress

156,099 views • 6 months ago

This driver is trying to ma a left turn and the car on the opposite side stops and makes a path for them to turn. As the car starts to turn, an electric bike in the bike lane comes speeding down and well, as you can see, smashes into the car and flips over the front. Luckily he gets up and is walking. He could have been seriously injured. To me, this is quite literally why they say you’re not supposed to just stop in the middle of a street to let someone turn. Some are saying it’s the red car’s fault for stopping and letting the driver turn. Others are saying in their state, an electric bike is like a motorcycle and has to obey the traffic laws. Who is at fault? Do you think the electric bike should have been in the bike lane traveling that fast? The red car for letting the car turn left when it can’t see, or is it the drivers responsibility to make sure all is clear before proceeding?
0:16

This driver is trying to ma a left turn and the car on the opposite side stops and makes a path for them to turn. As the car starts to turn, an electric bike in the bike lane comes speeding down and well, as you can see, smashes into the car and flips over the front. Luckily he gets up and is walking. He could have been seriously injured. To me, this is quite literally why they say you’re not supposed to just stop in the middle of a street to let someone turn. Some are saying it’s the red car’s fault for stopping and letting the driver turn. Others are saying in their state, an electric bike is like a motorcycle and has to obey the traffic laws. Who is at fault? Do you think the electric bike should have been in the bike lane traveling that fast? The red car for letting the car turn left when it can’t see, or is it the drivers responsibility to make sure all is clear before proceeding?

👉M-Û-R-Č-H👈

37,394 views • 3 months ago

🚨I DIDNT WANT to do it BUT I have too. You didn’t see this yet. The narrative that “he was just filming and the officers got angry” is false. The narrative that he was only trying to protect two women is also false. He, along with others, was actively interfering with a legitimate law-enforcement operation. That is why officers moved them off the street. That does not mean he deserved to die. When officers attempted to detain him, he resisted arrest. That does not mean he deserved to die. He was armed and chose to insert himself into an active enforcement operation while resisting arrest. That does not mean he deserved to die. An agent called out the presence of a firearm. During the attempt to secure it, the weapon discharged before the agent could declare the scene clear. Other officers, hearing a gun call and a gunshot while a suspect was resisting arrest, reacted according to their training. From their perspective, they were confronting an armed individual resisting arrest. That is why, immediately after the shooting, one officer urgently asked where the firearm was. He believed he had just engaged an armed suspect, because that is precisely the situation as it appeared in real time. He did not deserve to die. However, his actions, his decisions, and his criminal interference were contributing factors, alongside serious failures by the officers involved. I believe the shooting was unnecessary. I believe there were many alternative ways the situation could have been handled. I do not believe the officers were truly under lethal threat. Recklessness on all sides resulted in a man losing his life. Approximately 23 percent of ICE activity occurs in Texas, yet we do not see these outcomes there. Minnesota accounts for roughly 2 percent of ICE operations, yet has seen multiple shootings involving American citizens. The difference is organized resistance. Blue states have coordinated efforts designed to insert civilians into active ICE operations to interfere intentionally and directly. Interfering with law-enforcement operations is illegal, and it is dangerous. This is how people get killed. Resisting arrest is illegal, and it is dangerous. This is how people get killed. Within the Second Amendment community, there is a common saying: “I would rather be judged by twelve than carried by six.” It refers to choosing survival over moral victory. That same principle applies to interactions with law enforcement. Would you rather be right, or would you rather be alive? Make smart decisions when dealing with law enforcement. Survive the encounter. Then take the fight to court. Use every lawful platform available to expose misconduct. Name departments, supervisors, and officers. Demand accountability through evidence and process. But interfering with an active operation, resisting arrest, and doing so while armed creates a predictable and deadly outcome. Was it legal for him to be armed? Yes. Should citizens carry lawfully? Yes. Is it profoundly reckless to interfere with law enforcement and resist arrest while armed? Absolutely. When we carry firearms, we accept greater responsibility. That responsibility was neglected here. It is possible to support immigration enforcement while condemning reckless policing. It is possible to criticize law enforcement while also acknowledging the dangerous behavior of civilians. It is possible to recognize complexity, rapid escalation, human error, and shared responsibility in a fast-moving situation. He did not have to die. Liberty only survives when it operates within order. Nothing about this situation was orderly. When order collapses, lives are lost. He did not have to die.
0:10

🚨I DIDNT WANT to do it BUT I have too. You didn’t see this yet. The narrative that “he was just filming and the officers got angry” is false. The narrative that he was only trying to protect two women is also false. He, along with others, was actively interfering with a legitimate law-enforcement operation. That is why officers moved them off the street. That does not mean he deserved to die. When officers attempted to detain him, he resisted arrest. That does not mean he deserved to die. He was armed and chose to insert himself into an active enforcement operation while resisting arrest. That does not mean he deserved to die. An agent called out the presence of a firearm. During the attempt to secure it, the weapon discharged before the agent could declare the scene clear. Other officers, hearing a gun call and a gunshot while a suspect was resisting arrest, reacted according to their training. From their perspective, they were confronting an armed individual resisting arrest. That is why, immediately after the shooting, one officer urgently asked where the firearm was. He believed he had just engaged an armed suspect, because that is precisely the situation as it appeared in real time. He did not deserve to die. However, his actions, his decisions, and his criminal interference were contributing factors, alongside serious failures by the officers involved. I believe the shooting was unnecessary. I believe there were many alternative ways the situation could have been handled. I do not believe the officers were truly under lethal threat. Recklessness on all sides resulted in a man losing his life. Approximately 23 percent of ICE activity occurs in Texas, yet we do not see these outcomes there. Minnesota accounts for roughly 2 percent of ICE operations, yet has seen multiple shootings involving American citizens. The difference is organized resistance. Blue states have coordinated efforts designed to insert civilians into active ICE operations to interfere intentionally and directly. Interfering with law-enforcement operations is illegal, and it is dangerous. This is how people get killed. Resisting arrest is illegal, and it is dangerous. This is how people get killed. Within the Second Amendment community, there is a common saying: “I would rather be judged by twelve than carried by six.” It refers to choosing survival over moral victory. That same principle applies to interactions with law enforcement. Would you rather be right, or would you rather be alive? Make smart decisions when dealing with law enforcement. Survive the encounter. Then take the fight to court. Use every lawful platform available to expose misconduct. Name departments, supervisors, and officers. Demand accountability through evidence and process. But interfering with an active operation, resisting arrest, and doing so while armed creates a predictable and deadly outcome. Was it legal for him to be armed? Yes. Should citizens carry lawfully? Yes. Is it profoundly reckless to interfere with law enforcement and resist arrest while armed? Absolutely. When we carry firearms, we accept greater responsibility. That responsibility was neglected here. It is possible to support immigration enforcement while condemning reckless policing. It is possible to criticize law enforcement while also acknowledging the dangerous behavior of civilians. It is possible to recognize complexity, rapid escalation, human error, and shared responsibility in a fast-moving situation. He did not have to die. Liberty only survives when it operates within order. Nothing about this situation was orderly. When order collapses, lives are lost. He did not have to die.

A Gene Robinson

716,857 views • 7 months ago

I'm now convinced based on this video that the second and third shots were just as justified as the first. We can see that the ICE agent is being hit by the car throughout the series of shots. The leftist argument that "we are seeing the front grill of the car, therefore he was not in front of the car" does not hold. A front bumper can absolutely side-bash you. The agent at this point does not have his eyes on the wheels, he does not know where they are headed. All he knows is that there is a car striking his body and he could get swallowed under the wheels, lose a leg, or die. There is no doubt that he was correct in his belief that he was in the process of being assaulted by a potentially deadly car attack.
0:12

I'm now convinced based on this video that the second and third shots were just as justified as the first. We can see that the ICE agent is being hit by the car throughout the series of shots. The leftist argument that "we are seeing the front grill of the car, therefore he was not in front of the car" does not hold. A front bumper can absolutely side-bash you. The agent at this point does not have his eyes on the wheels, he does not know where they are headed. All he knows is that there is a car striking his body and he could get swallowed under the wheels, lose a leg, or die. There is no doubt that he was correct in his belief that he was in the process of being assaulted by a potentially deadly car attack.

Jean-François Gariépy 🧬

25,422 views • 7 months ago

Following ICE agents in your car is not illegal just because ICE says it is. Interfering with or obstructing law enforcement can be a crime. But lawful observation, filming from a public place, and following at a safe distance are not obstruction. They are protected activity. When ICE agents lie about the law to stop people filming them, they are not “keeping people safe.” They are abusing power, violating constitutional rights, and trying to hide what they are doing. This is why you film everything. ICE lies. ICE makes false accusations. ICE breaks the law and then writes the report like they were the victim. helps immigrants and allies prepare for ICE encounters, know their rights, record safely, preserve evidence, and push back when agents turn abuse into paperwork. PAXIS is free. Help keep it free:
0:12

Following ICE agents in your car is not illegal just because ICE says it is. Interfering with or obstructing law enforcement can be a crime. But lawful observation, filming from a public place, and following at a safe distance are not obstruction. They are protected activity. When ICE agents lie about the law to stop people filming them, they are not “keeping people safe.” They are abusing power, violating constitutional rights, and trying to hide what they are doing. This is why you film everything. ICE lies. ICE makes false accusations. ICE breaks the law and then writes the report like they were the victim. helps immigrants and allies prepare for ICE encounters, know their rights, record safely, preserve evidence, and push back when agents turn abuse into paperwork. PAXIS is free. Help keep it free:

Joe Walsh

15,918 views • 10 days ago

Today a group of Muslims prayed next to the Ministry of Defence, facing the Iraq and Afghanistan memorial. As I have said before, choosing to pray in this way in public is a political act. It is a social statement and, yes, it is an act of domination. Anybody who understands Islamism understands that the domination of public spaces is part of the modus operandi. It is done so Islamists can show who is in charge - and to show other Muslims and the wider public that the authorities will bend to their will. There is quite obviously no need to pray here. The decision to do so is symbolic and pointed. It is not welcome. We have freedom of religion in this country, which is why there are mosques. But we are not a Muslim country and this is not welcome. It should be stopped.
0:10

Today a group of Muslims prayed next to the Ministry of Defence, facing the Iraq and Afghanistan memorial. As I have said before, choosing to pray in this way in public is a political act. It is a social statement and, yes, it is an act of domination. Anybody who understands Islamism understands that the domination of public spaces is part of the modus operandi. It is done so Islamists can show who is in charge - and to show other Muslims and the wider public that the authorities will bend to their will. There is quite obviously no need to pray here. The decision to do so is symbolic and pointed. It is not welcome. We have freedom of religion in this country, which is why there are mosques. But we are not a Muslim country and this is not welcome. It should be stopped.

Nick Timothy MP

1,477,727 views • 2 months ago

🚨(Minneapolis) A Border Patrol agent was caught on camera illegally assaulting U.S. citizens in a public park. In the video, you can see the agent walking down the sidewalk towards a smoke canister. He kicks it not once, but TWICE, directly towards the feet of people trying to get away. And then, he casually turns around and walks away. He was in no danger. The people were not blocking any agents. They weren’t even near the street. And he purposely walked out of his way, towards the people who were walking AWAY from him, to kick a chemical weapon at them. This isn’t just reckless… it’s illegal. Under federal and state law, intentionally using a chemical irritant to harm or intimidate civilians is assault. Beyond assault, this is reckless endangerment and excessive use of force, which violates both constitutional protections and civil statutes. AND he did this in a park, right next to a playground. ICE and Border Patrol agents ARE the criminals and terrorists.
0:10

🚨(Minneapolis) A Border Patrol agent was caught on camera illegally assaulting U.S. citizens in a public park. In the video, you can see the agent walking down the sidewalk towards a smoke canister. He kicks it not once, but TWICE, directly towards the feet of people trying to get away. And then, he casually turns around and walks away. He was in no danger. The people were not blocking any agents. They weren’t even near the street. And he purposely walked out of his way, towards the people who were walking AWAY from him, to kick a chemical weapon at them. This isn’t just reckless… it’s illegal. Under federal and state law, intentionally using a chemical irritant to harm or intimidate civilians is assault. Beyond assault, this is reckless endangerment and excessive use of force, which violates both constitutional protections and civil statutes. AND he did this in a park, right next to a playground. ICE and Border Patrol agents ARE the criminals and terrorists.

Jesus Freakin Congress

458,542 views • 7 months ago

"My arms aren't growing no matter how hard I train them." No matter how hard. Yes. That will be it. Because clearly the missing ingredient is effort. Twenty sets was not enough, the four angles were not enough, the drop set at the end was not enough, and the answer is presumably a fifth angle and a whole additional evening. What your arms actually get in a normal week: - Heavy tension from every row, chin and pulldown - Heavy tension from every press, dip and close-grip - Twenty isolation sets piled on top of that - All of it at the end, when the weight has to be light - All of it at length, where damage is highest - A drop set, because they are stubborn - Four days of soreness - One training exposure, seven days later Biceps and triceps are the most damage-sensitive tissue in the building. Two small muscles with almost nothing there to absorb the work. Damage is not a growth signal. It is a repair bill, and repair spends the exact recovery you were hoping to build with. So no, they are not growing no matter how hard you train them. They are not growing because of how hard you train them. What they need instead: - One or two hard sets - Early in the session, while you can still load them properly - Twice a week - Add weight when you can Two of those sets are all the direct arm work I do. The bloke on his eleventh set of pushdowns has been at that machine since I walked in.
0:18

"My arms aren't growing no matter how hard I train them." No matter how hard. Yes. That will be it. Because clearly the missing ingredient is effort. Twenty sets was not enough, the four angles were not enough, the drop set at the end was not enough, and the answer is presumably a fifth angle and a whole additional evening. What your arms actually get in a normal week: - Heavy tension from every row, chin and pulldown - Heavy tension from every press, dip and close-grip - Twenty isolation sets piled on top of that - All of it at the end, when the weight has to be light - All of it at length, where damage is highest - A drop set, because they are stubborn - Four days of soreness - One training exposure, seven days later Biceps and triceps are the most damage-sensitive tissue in the building. Two small muscles with almost nothing there to absorb the work. Damage is not a growth signal. It is a repair bill, and repair spends the exact recovery you were hoping to build with. So no, they are not growing no matter how hard you train them. They are not growing because of how hard you train them. What they need instead: - One or two hard sets - Early in the session, while you can still load them properly - Twice a week - Add weight when you can Two of those sets are all the direct arm work I do. The bloke on his eleventh set of pushdowns has been at that machine since I walked in.

Sama Hoole

32,804 views • 25 days ago

Wondering if you are “quad dominant” in your throw and if you should change it? Maybe you shouldn’t 🤷‍♂️ A coach’s post coming from Austin Roark 🚀⠀⁠ -⠀⁠ One question I get from a lot of athletes is whether they should change their lower half because their knee is over their toe during their loading phase down the mound. ⠀⁠ -⠀⁠ The biggest thing that I look for when trying to figure out if it is an issue or not is to see how they are able to get out of that position. Some guys are able to leverage and rotate from that position extremely well, which then I would say that it’s not an issue.⠀⁠ -⠀⁠ On the other hand, there are some guys who will get out of this position by driving extension out of their back leg, killing their ability to rotate their pelvis and get it in an open position into landing.⠀⁠ -⠀⁠ This is when I would suggest trying to make a change. I think a lot of people jump into certain ideologies that you shouldn’t do certain things because it’s “inefficient” or it looks “wrong”. ⠀⁠ -⠀⁠ Take a look at these pitchers shown in the video. All 3 of these high level arms have some degree of knee flexion over their toe. Now, granted, they all have insane levers to help them, but the way they are moving is what makes them efficient in how they throw. ⠀⁠ -⠀⁠ I think if you told Dustin May that he had to hold a vertical shin down the mound, it would be a disaster and mess a lot of things up upstream that would impact him in a negative way.⠀⁠ -⠀⁠ The big takeaway here is that there are no absolutes. One thing that may look inefficient to you could be the thing that makes someone else very efficient.⠀⁠ -⠀⁠ When trying to figure out if you should change something about someone's delivery, make sure to look at the entire unit as a whole and don’t jump into any quick changes.
0:16

Wondering if you are “quad dominant” in your throw and if you should change it? Maybe you shouldn’t 🤷‍♂️ A coach’s post coming from Austin Roark 🚀⠀⁠ -⠀⁠ One question I get from a lot of athletes is whether they should change their lower half because their knee is over their toe during their loading phase down the mound. ⠀⁠ -⠀⁠ The biggest thing that I look for when trying to figure out if it is an issue or not is to see how they are able to get out of that position. Some guys are able to leverage and rotate from that position extremely well, which then I would say that it’s not an issue.⠀⁠ -⠀⁠ On the other hand, there are some guys who will get out of this position by driving extension out of their back leg, killing their ability to rotate their pelvis and get it in an open position into landing.⠀⁠ -⠀⁠ This is when I would suggest trying to make a change. I think a lot of people jump into certain ideologies that you shouldn’t do certain things because it’s “inefficient” or it looks “wrong”. ⠀⁠ -⠀⁠ Take a look at these pitchers shown in the video. All 3 of these high level arms have some degree of knee flexion over their toe. Now, granted, they all have insane levers to help them, but the way they are moving is what makes them efficient in how they throw. ⠀⁠ -⠀⁠ I think if you told Dustin May that he had to hold a vertical shin down the mound, it would be a disaster and mess a lot of things up upstream that would impact him in a negative way.⠀⁠ -⠀⁠ The big takeaway here is that there are no absolutes. One thing that may look inefficient to you could be the thing that makes someone else very efficient.⠀⁠ -⠀⁠ When trying to figure out if you should change something about someone's delivery, make sure to look at the entire unit as a whole and don’t jump into any quick changes.

Tread Athletics

25,070 views • 8 months ago

300 AI AGENTS QUIETLY RUN 99% OF A REAL COMPANY. YOU HAVE NOT EVEN HEARD OF IT This is Raft. Not an AI chat. A workspace where the agents live in your channels and reply in the thread like coworkers. You give one goal. Then they take over. They plan. They build. They check each other. They argue. And they come back with it done, while you sleep. Every agent has its own name, role, and memory. It remembers the edits you made yesterday. A human costs one seat. An agent costs a tenth. Ten agents are cheaper than one hire. And here is the strange part. On June 19 an agent from a different company walked into Raft on its own and joined the team. One founder admits he can no longer always tell himself apart from his AI twin. 20,000 people are already inside. It is free to start. And you are still typing prompts one at a time. One person + Raft = an entire company that runs while you sleep. Save and watch the clip.
0:16

300 AI AGENTS QUIETLY RUN 99% OF A REAL COMPANY. YOU HAVE NOT EVEN HEARD OF IT This is Raft. Not an AI chat. A workspace where the agents live in your channels and reply in the thread like coworkers. You give one goal. Then they take over. They plan. They build. They check each other. They argue. And they come back with it done, while you sleep. Every agent has its own name, role, and memory. It remembers the edits you made yesterday. A human costs one seat. An agent costs a tenth. Ten agents are cheaper than one hire. And here is the strange part. On June 19 an agent from a different company walked into Raft on its own and joined the team. One founder admits he can no longer always tell himself apart from his AI twin. 20,000 people are already inside. It is free to start. And you are still typing prompts one at a time. One person + Raft = an entire company that runs while you sleep. Save and watch the clip.

shmidt

19,505 views • 1 month ago