Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

На главную

🚨BREAKING: ICE agents, in Texas, admitted, on camera, that they illegally pulled over a woman, and still demand to see her ID. In the video, the agent tells the driver that they are looking for a woman, and say the person’s name they are looking for. The driver immediately...

TheJFreakinC's profile picture

Jesus Freakin Congress

55,235 subscribers

31,219 просмотров • 23 дней назад •via X (Twitter)

Новости и политика
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

Комментарии: 0

Нет доступных комментариев

Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста

Похожие видео

🚨BREAKING: ICE/Border Patrol agents illegally demand a woman prove her citizenship, then lie about having a warrant for someone connected to her home, and refuse to show it, in Eden Prairie, Minnesota. In the video, ICE agents confront a woman outside her home and demand she hand over her ID to “prove” she is a U.S. citizen, something they have no legal authority to require without reasonable suspicion of a specific crime. She asks why they need her ID. They tell her they have a “target” who lives at the address. So she asks, “Who is the target?” An agent responds, “We have to make sure you aren’t our target,” then immediately asks, “Do you live at this address?” She says yes. The person filming points out the obvious and tells her she should call 911, because she already stated she’s a citizen and ICE has no jurisdiction over U.S. citizens. That’s when the agent says, “She never said she was a citizen. Calm down.” The woman corrects him. She clearly states she is a citizen, and explains they never asked her about her status, they just demanded ID, which again, is not legal. The agent repeats himself, claiming they have a target connected to the home and want to make sure she isn’t that person. She then asks the only question that matters: “Do you have a warrant?” An agent says, “Yes, we have a warrant for their arrest.” She asks to see it. They refuse. Instead, the agent says, “I’ve got to make sure you are the person.” That’s still not how warrants work. If ICE actually had a valid warrant, they would already know who they were looking for, would not be guessing, and would be legally required to present it on request. Standing outside a home doesn’t change that. You don’t have to identify yourself just so federal agents can decide whether their claimed warrant applies to you. This is a textbook ICE intimidation tactic… demand ID, lie about warrants, deny proof, and hope people don’t know their rights. ICE/Border Patrol agents are harassing U.S. citizens in their own neighborhood, fishing for consent they are not entitled to. And this is how rights get erased, not all at once, but slowly, through lies, pressure, and people being told to “calm down.”
1:44

🚨BREAKING: ICE/Border Patrol agents illegally demand a woman prove her citizenship, then lie about having a warrant for someone connected to her home, and refuse to show it, in Eden Prairie, Minnesota. In the video, ICE agents confront a woman outside her home and demand she hand over her ID to “prove” she is a U.S. citizen, something they have no legal authority to require without reasonable suspicion of a specific crime. She asks why they need her ID. They tell her they have a “target” who lives at the address. So she asks, “Who is the target?” An agent responds, “We have to make sure you aren’t our target,” then immediately asks, “Do you live at this address?” She says yes. The person filming points out the obvious and tells her she should call 911, because she already stated she’s a citizen and ICE has no jurisdiction over U.S. citizens. That’s when the agent says, “She never said she was a citizen. Calm down.” The woman corrects him. She clearly states she is a citizen, and explains they never asked her about her status, they just demanded ID, which again, is not legal. The agent repeats himself, claiming they have a target connected to the home and want to make sure she isn’t that person. She then asks the only question that matters: “Do you have a warrant?” An agent says, “Yes, we have a warrant for their arrest.” She asks to see it. They refuse. Instead, the agent says, “I’ve got to make sure you are the person.” That’s still not how warrants work. If ICE actually had a valid warrant, they would already know who they were looking for, would not be guessing, and would be legally required to present it on request. Standing outside a home doesn’t change that. You don’t have to identify yourself just so federal agents can decide whether their claimed warrant applies to you. This is a textbook ICE intimidation tactic… demand ID, lie about warrants, deny proof, and hope people don’t know their rights. ICE/Border Patrol agents are harassing U.S. citizens in their own neighborhood, fishing for consent they are not entitled to. And this is how rights get erased, not all at once, but slowly, through lies, pressure, and people being told to “calm down.”

Jesus Freakin Congress

443,289 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

🚨Another day, another video of ICE agents demanding a U.S. citizen prove his citizenship… this time, in Philadelphia. In the video, ICE agents box in a man’s car and immediately demand ID, without giving an explanation… Just, “There is a subject we are looking for.” The man responds exactly how anyone who knows their rights would: “What did I do?” And that matters… Because under the Fourth Amendment, law enforcement cannot detain you just to “check.” They need reasonable, articulable suspicion that you committed a crime, or are the specific person they’re looking for. Not just the same race, or, “you look like someone.” When agents surround a vehicle so you can’t leave, that’s a seizure, legally. That triggers constitutional protections. Instead of articulating a reason, the agent shifts the language: “I need to verify your identity.” No, they don’t. They can only demand identification if the stop, itself, is lawful. And the stop is only lawful if they can clearly explain why they believe you are the subject they’re looking for. Notice what they never say in the video: -They never describe the suspect. -They never state a crime. -They never explain how he matches the person they are “looking for.” Just, “we’re looking for someone.” That is not enough. Then, the agent tries to grab the man’s ID without consent. The man pulls it back and says, “Don’t touch my ID.” He’s right. Officers don’t get to physically seize your property without legal authority. The agent then looks at the ID from a distance and walks away. Which tells us something important… If they truly had probable cause, this would not have ended with a casual glance and retreat. ICE does not have authority to randomly stop citizens to “verify” they’re not someone else. That is exactly the kind of policing the Constitution was written to prevent. If agents can box in your car, demand your identity without stating a crime, and fish for compliance… then everyone’s rights are conditional. And conditional rights aren’t rights at all.
0:38

🚨Another day, another video of ICE agents demanding a U.S. citizen prove his citizenship… this time, in Philadelphia. In the video, ICE agents box in a man’s car and immediately demand ID, without giving an explanation… Just, “There is a subject we are looking for.” The man responds exactly how anyone who knows their rights would: “What did I do?” And that matters… Because under the Fourth Amendment, law enforcement cannot detain you just to “check.” They need reasonable, articulable suspicion that you committed a crime, or are the specific person they’re looking for. Not just the same race, or, “you look like someone.” When agents surround a vehicle so you can’t leave, that’s a seizure, legally. That triggers constitutional protections. Instead of articulating a reason, the agent shifts the language: “I need to verify your identity.” No, they don’t. They can only demand identification if the stop, itself, is lawful. And the stop is only lawful if they can clearly explain why they believe you are the subject they’re looking for. Notice what they never say in the video: -They never describe the suspect. -They never state a crime. -They never explain how he matches the person they are “looking for.” Just, “we’re looking for someone.” That is not enough. Then, the agent tries to grab the man’s ID without consent. The man pulls it back and says, “Don’t touch my ID.” He’s right. Officers don’t get to physically seize your property without legal authority. The agent then looks at the ID from a distance and walks away. Which tells us something important… If they truly had probable cause, this would not have ended with a casual glance and retreat. ICE does not have authority to randomly stop citizens to “verify” they’re not someone else. That is exactly the kind of policing the Constitution was written to prevent. If agents can box in your car, demand your identity without stating a crime, and fish for compliance… then everyone’s rights are conditional. And conditional rights aren’t rights at all.

Jesus Freakin Congress

77,547 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

🚨ICE agents illegally threatened to tase a PASSENGER for refusing to exit a vehicle… after lying about having a warrant for him, in Lennox, California. In the video, the agents repeatedly insisted they had a warrant for the passenger, demanded he get out of the car, and threatened to tase him if he didn’t comply. But, when the passenger continued to ask to see the warrant, the agents suddenly asked for his ID. After running his identification, they decided to change the story… Agents then started asking the driver for their ID, despite admitting they did not know who they were dealing with. When questioned, one agent first claimed they had a warrant for the passenger, then admitted they were “writing it right now,” before finally acknowledging, “I thought it was you.” So, to break this all down… ICE agents threatened to tase someone over a warrant they didn’t have, for a person they hadn’t even identified. The Fourth Amendment exists for a reason. Government agents do not get to detain whoever they want, threaten force, demand identification from everyone present, and just figure out who they are dealing with later. Because that’s illegal. If ICE had a valid warrant, they should have been able to identify the subject of that warrant before threatening someone with a taser. And if they didn’t know who they were talking to… then what exactly was the legal basis for the detention, the threats, and the demands for identification? This is why people are outraged. And every time this behavior is excused, it sends the message that ICE agents can ignore constitutional rights, threaten innocent people, and walk away like nothing happened.
1:38

🚨ICE agents illegally threatened to tase a PASSENGER for refusing to exit a vehicle… after lying about having a warrant for him, in Lennox, California. In the video, the agents repeatedly insisted they had a warrant for the passenger, demanded he get out of the car, and threatened to tase him if he didn’t comply. But, when the passenger continued to ask to see the warrant, the agents suddenly asked for his ID. After running his identification, they decided to change the story… Agents then started asking the driver for their ID, despite admitting they did not know who they were dealing with. When questioned, one agent first claimed they had a warrant for the passenger, then admitted they were “writing it right now,” before finally acknowledging, “I thought it was you.” So, to break this all down… ICE agents threatened to tase someone over a warrant they didn’t have, for a person they hadn’t even identified. The Fourth Amendment exists for a reason. Government agents do not get to detain whoever they want, threaten force, demand identification from everyone present, and just figure out who they are dealing with later. Because that’s illegal. If ICE had a valid warrant, they should have been able to identify the subject of that warrant before threatening someone with a taser. And if they didn’t know who they were talking to… then what exactly was the legal basis for the detention, the threats, and the demands for identification? This is why people are outraged. And every time this behavior is excused, it sends the message that ICE agents can ignore constitutional rights, threaten innocent people, and walk away like nothing happened.

Jesus Freakin Congress

58,638 просмотров • 18 дней назад

🚨BREAKING: ICE agents illegally assaulted a 19-year-old U.S. citizen, and then kidnapped him, while admitting on camera they didn’t even know who he was, in Olathe, Kansas. In the video, an agent is sitting on the teenager’s back as his 14-year-old brother screams that he’s a U.S. citizen, in a Walmart parking lot. The agent responds: “Well, we’re going to find that out since whoever drives this [pointing to the truck] isn’t.” That sentence is the admission. Because it shows the only thing they knew, at that moment, was something about the registered owner of the truck… not the person they had pinned to the pavement. Vehicle registration tells you who owns a car. It does NOT tell you who is driving it. Before law enforcement can detain someone, they need individualized reasonable suspicion tied to that person. If they had not confirmed the driver matched the registered owner… If they had not observed a crime… If they had no warrant… Then pinning him down, handcuffing him, and loading him into a vehicle raises serious Fourth Amendment concerns. You don’t get to tackle someone first and figure out who they are later. You don’t get to use force based on “we’ll find out.” The issue isn’t just that he’s a U.S. citizen… The issue is whether agents had lawful, INDIVIDUALIZED suspicion to detain him before they used force. Because when law enforcement starts treating vehicle registration as automatic suspicion for whoever is behind the wheel… That’s collective punishment. And the Constitution does not allow that.
1:07

🚨BREAKING: ICE agents illegally assaulted a 19-year-old U.S. citizen, and then kidnapped him, while admitting on camera they didn’t even know who he was, in Olathe, Kansas. In the video, an agent is sitting on the teenager’s back as his 14-year-old brother screams that he’s a U.S. citizen, in a Walmart parking lot. The agent responds: “Well, we’re going to find that out since whoever drives this [pointing to the truck] isn’t.” That sentence is the admission. Because it shows the only thing they knew, at that moment, was something about the registered owner of the truck… not the person they had pinned to the pavement. Vehicle registration tells you who owns a car. It does NOT tell you who is driving it. Before law enforcement can detain someone, they need individualized reasonable suspicion tied to that person. If they had not confirmed the driver matched the registered owner… If they had not observed a crime… If they had no warrant… Then pinning him down, handcuffing him, and loading him into a vehicle raises serious Fourth Amendment concerns. You don’t get to tackle someone first and figure out who they are later. You don’t get to use force based on “we’ll find out.” The issue isn’t just that he’s a U.S. citizen… The issue is whether agents had lawful, INDIVIDUALIZED suspicion to detain him before they used force. Because when law enforcement starts treating vehicle registration as automatic suspicion for whoever is behind the wheel… That’s collective punishment. And the Constitution does not allow that.

Jesus Freakin Congress

396,887 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

🚨BREAKING: ICE agents followed STUDENTS to their home… boxed them in… and then tried to call it a “consensual encounter,” in Shakopee, Minnesota. In the video, the students pulled into a parking spot at their home. Multiple ICE vehicles pulled up behind them and blocked them in. Then, agents approached and demanded ID. When a neighbor started filming and asked why they were following the students, the agent claimed this was a “consensual encounter”… and said the driver had “stopped for them.” Except she parked her car and they pulled up behind her… And that distinction matters legally. A consensual encounter only exists if a reasonable person would feel free to leave. You are not free to leave when multiple government vehicles pull in behind you and block your car. That is a seizure under the Fourth Amendment. And a seizure requires reasonable suspicion of a crime. When asked the reason for the stop, the agent said they were “stopped in the middle of the road.” …They were in a parking spot. Then, the agent tells the driver, “I think we stopped and talked to you the other day.” So, this is the SECOND time they’ve illegally targeted and followed a CHILD. And let’s be honest about the power dynamic here… When agents surround your vehicle, when they have a documented pattern of escalating encounters, when people across the country have been dragged out of cars, tackled, tased, or shot at during these so-called “stops,” no reasonable person believes they can just drive away without consequences. Consent under threat of force is not consent. If ICE wants to detain someone, they need lawful grounds, they need articulable suspicion. They do not get to follow students home, block them in, and retroactively call it “consensual” because someone asked questions on camera. This is how constitutional erosion happens. If federal agents can redefine “parking” as “stopping for them,” and redefine “blocked in” as “free to leave,” then the Fourth Amendment becomes whatever they say it is in the moment. And that should alarm everyone.
2:02

🚨BREAKING: ICE agents followed STUDENTS to their home… boxed them in… and then tried to call it a “consensual encounter,” in Shakopee, Minnesota. In the video, the students pulled into a parking spot at their home. Multiple ICE vehicles pulled up behind them and blocked them in. Then, agents approached and demanded ID. When a neighbor started filming and asked why they were following the students, the agent claimed this was a “consensual encounter”… and said the driver had “stopped for them.” Except she parked her car and they pulled up behind her… And that distinction matters legally. A consensual encounter only exists if a reasonable person would feel free to leave. You are not free to leave when multiple government vehicles pull in behind you and block your car. That is a seizure under the Fourth Amendment. And a seizure requires reasonable suspicion of a crime. When asked the reason for the stop, the agent said they were “stopped in the middle of the road.” …They were in a parking spot. Then, the agent tells the driver, “I think we stopped and talked to you the other day.” So, this is the SECOND time they’ve illegally targeted and followed a CHILD. And let’s be honest about the power dynamic here… When agents surround your vehicle, when they have a documented pattern of escalating encounters, when people across the country have been dragged out of cars, tackled, tased, or shot at during these so-called “stops,” no reasonable person believes they can just drive away without consequences. Consent under threat of force is not consent. If ICE wants to detain someone, they need lawful grounds, they need articulable suspicion. They do not get to follow students home, block them in, and retroactively call it “consensual” because someone asked questions on camera. This is how constitutional erosion happens. If federal agents can redefine “parking” as “stopping for them,” and redefine “blocked in” as “free to leave,” then the Fourth Amendment becomes whatever they say it is in the moment. And that should alarm everyone.

Jesus Freakin Congress

388,839 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

Police Broke Down Door in Mistaken Identity Case in Baton Rouge Officers asked for Brooks’ name. He refused to answer and asked them to get off his property. The video shows officers following him, kicking open his door, and detaining him. Shortly after, the officers put Brooks in handcuffs. He said he then told officers his name, and that is when they realized they had the wrong person. “What took place was, you were mistaken for someone else. We got a call that said the person that we were looking for was at this house, and when they pulled up, you looked just like that person,” another officer said.
1:54

Police Broke Down Door in Mistaken Identity Case in Baton Rouge Officers asked for Brooks’ name. He refused to answer and asked them to get off his property. The video shows officers following him, kicking open his door, and detaining him. Shortly after, the officers put Brooks in handcuffs. He said he then told officers his name, and that is when they realized they had the wrong person. “What took place was, you were mistaken for someone else. We got a call that said the person that we were looking for was at this house, and when they pulled up, you looked just like that person,” another officer said.

American Crime Stories

15,600 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

This woman was visiting Japan, while there she stayed in what she thought was a reputable hotel. When she got back to her room from sight seeing, she laid on her bad and noticed a strange smell. She looked around and couldn’t see anything then she looked under the bed and saw the eyes of a man. She screamed loudly and then he screamed and ran out. The hotel employees immediately came up to the room and called the police. She asked the hotel workers how something like this happened. Their response to her was suspicious and chilling, they said that the police will never find him because they don’t have cameras. She checked out and demanded a refund, they offered her $178 in hotel credit coupons. They eventually refunded her $600 but still didn’t do a report because they claim they need to clarify the details of what happened. Based on how uncooperative they were and how they were refusing to acknowledge and accept responsibility, is it entirely possible it was a hotel worker and they are covering for them, why else would a hotel chain not have security cameras?
2:17

This woman was visiting Japan, while there she stayed in what she thought was a reputable hotel. When she got back to her room from sight seeing, she laid on her bad and noticed a strange smell. She looked around and couldn’t see anything then she looked under the bed and saw the eyes of a man. She screamed loudly and then he screamed and ran out. The hotel employees immediately came up to the room and called the police. She asked the hotel workers how something like this happened. Their response to her was suspicious and chilling, they said that the police will never find him because they don’t have cameras. She checked out and demanded a refund, they offered her $178 in hotel credit coupons. They eventually refunded her $600 but still didn’t do a report because they claim they need to clarify the details of what happened. Based on how uncooperative they were and how they were refusing to acknowledge and accept responsibility, is it entirely possible it was a hotel worker and they are covering for them, why else would a hotel chain not have security cameras?

SonnyBoy🇺🇸

440,328 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

🚨BREAKING: Border Patrol agents violently pulled a U.S. citizen PASSENGER from a vehicle, slamming him to the ground… Then shouted that he had a gun, even though he didn’t. In Tucson, Arizona, state troopers pulled over a vehicle. While they were stopped on the side of the road, the state trooper called Border Patrol because the PASSENGER appeared to be Hispanic. When Border Patrol arrived, the situation immediately escalated to agents smashed both passenger-side windows. One agent tried to hit the phone out of the driver’s hand, who was recording, as they violently ripped the backseat passenger out of the vehicle, and threw him onto the ground, while multiple agents pin him down. Then, an agent ordered the driver out of the vehicle. She responded, “I didn’t do anything.” The agent replied, “Step out or you are going to get tackled.” At that point, at least three agents already had the passenger pinned, with his hands behind his back, when another agent suddenly yelled, “Gun!” A fourth agent responded, “He has a gun?” The driver immediately yells back, “NO! He has NO gun. WE HAVE NO WEAPONS!” The agent, closest to the car, was startled by this, appearing to forget the driver was still inside… and filming. That’s when he reached into the vehicle, grabbed her phone, threw it from her hand, and attempted to pull her out of the car. There is a lot going on in this video, so let’s break this down… First… you don’t get to detain people based on how they look. The Fourth Amendment requires individualized, reasonable suspicion. Not “he looked Hispanic.” Second… a passenger, during a traffic stop, is not automatically required to identify themselves, or hand over ID. Law enforcement needs a lawful basis… like reasonable suspicion that that specific person committed a crime… to demand identification. Third… even when someone is lawfully detained, they are only required to comply with lawful orders tied to THAT detention. A passenger doesn’t lose constitutional protections just because someone else was pulled over, while driving. Fourth… the First Amendment protects the right to record law enforcement, in public, while they’re doing their job. Knocking a phone away, or throwing it because someone is filming, is violating that constitutional right. And finally, any use of force… breaking windows, pulling someone out of a car, and restraining them… has to be objectively reasonable under the Fourth Amendment. That requires specific, articulable facts, not assumptions about identity. This wasn’t a checkpoint. It wasn’t a border stop. This was a traffic stop where a PASSENGER became the target because of how he looked. And if that’s enough to trigger federal agents breaking windows, and violently pulling U.S. citizens out of cars… then every single person should be demanding answers, and accountability. Because this could’ve ended with another U.S. citizen dead… And next time, that U.S. citizen could be you.
0:54

🚨BREAKING: Border Patrol agents violently pulled a U.S. citizen PASSENGER from a vehicle, slamming him to the ground… Then shouted that he had a gun, even though he didn’t. In Tucson, Arizona, state troopers pulled over a vehicle. While they were stopped on the side of the road, the state trooper called Border Patrol because the PASSENGER appeared to be Hispanic. When Border Patrol arrived, the situation immediately escalated to agents smashed both passenger-side windows. One agent tried to hit the phone out of the driver’s hand, who was recording, as they violently ripped the backseat passenger out of the vehicle, and threw him onto the ground, while multiple agents pin him down. Then, an agent ordered the driver out of the vehicle. She responded, “I didn’t do anything.” The agent replied, “Step out or you are going to get tackled.” At that point, at least three agents already had the passenger pinned, with his hands behind his back, when another agent suddenly yelled, “Gun!” A fourth agent responded, “He has a gun?” The driver immediately yells back, “NO! He has NO gun. WE HAVE NO WEAPONS!” The agent, closest to the car, was startled by this, appearing to forget the driver was still inside… and filming. That’s when he reached into the vehicle, grabbed her phone, threw it from her hand, and attempted to pull her out of the car. There is a lot going on in this video, so let’s break this down… First… you don’t get to detain people based on how they look. The Fourth Amendment requires individualized, reasonable suspicion. Not “he looked Hispanic.” Second… a passenger, during a traffic stop, is not automatically required to identify themselves, or hand over ID. Law enforcement needs a lawful basis… like reasonable suspicion that that specific person committed a crime… to demand identification. Third… even when someone is lawfully detained, they are only required to comply with lawful orders tied to THAT detention. A passenger doesn’t lose constitutional protections just because someone else was pulled over, while driving. Fourth… the First Amendment protects the right to record law enforcement, in public, while they’re doing their job. Knocking a phone away, or throwing it because someone is filming, is violating that constitutional right. And finally, any use of force… breaking windows, pulling someone out of a car, and restraining them… has to be objectively reasonable under the Fourth Amendment. That requires specific, articulable facts, not assumptions about identity. This wasn’t a checkpoint. It wasn’t a border stop. This was a traffic stop where a PASSENGER became the target because of how he looked. And if that’s enough to trigger federal agents breaking windows, and violently pulling U.S. citizens out of cars… then every single person should be demanding answers, and accountability. Because this could’ve ended with another U.S. citizen dead… And next time, that U.S. citizen could be you.

Jesus Freakin Congress

219,874 просмотров • 6 дней назад

A couple was pulled over by immigration agents in Minneapolis, Minnesota. When an agent ordered the woman out of the vehicle, she stated that they were U.S. citizens. When asked why they ran, she responded, “You are scary people,” but then said they did not run. After a brief exchange, the agents physically removed both individuals from the vehicle. tt: nota.sandi
2:06

A couple was pulled over by immigration agents in Minneapolis, Minnesota. When an agent ordered the woman out of the vehicle, she stated that they were U.S. citizens. When asked why they ran, she responded, “You are scary people,” but then said they did not run. After a brief exchange, the agents physically removed both individuals from the vehicle. tt: nota.sandi

ICE of TikTok

69,436 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад

Lagos sanitation: For over 30 years, the Yorubas were practicing every Saturday, at the end of the month, sanitation. But guess who dragged the Lagos Government to court? An Igbo woman, Faith Okafor. She sued Lagos to court on why they would ask her to stay home and clean her environment. She won! She took Lagos to court, and the judge quickly ruled in her favor. But guess who the judge was? Yep, another Igbo person, Justice Ugochukwu Ogakwu, who was quick to rule in her favor. When they asked an ordinary Igbo person on the street, he said he liked that they canceled the Saturday sanitation. When they asked a Yoruba person, he said he did not like it because that was the way they had been keeping Lagos clean. Fast forward to today, who are the people who always come online to shout that Lagos is dirty and smelling? The same Igbo people!!! Thats all i got to say !! 🪬
0:25

Lagos sanitation: For over 30 years, the Yorubas were practicing every Saturday, at the end of the month, sanitation. But guess who dragged the Lagos Government to court? An Igbo woman, Faith Okafor. She sued Lagos to court on why they would ask her to stay home and clean her environment. She won! She took Lagos to court, and the judge quickly ruled in her favor. But guess who the judge was? Yep, another Igbo person, Justice Ugochukwu Ogakwu, who was quick to rule in her favor. When they asked an ordinary Igbo person on the street, he said he liked that they canceled the Saturday sanitation. When they asked a Yoruba person, he said he did not like it because that was the way they had been keeping Lagos clean. Fast forward to today, who are the people who always come online to shout that Lagos is dirty and smelling? The same Igbo people!!! Thats all i got to say !! 🪬

Nononsense

57,092 просмотров • 1 год назад

🚨 This is horrifying… In the Chicago suburbs, ICE/Border Patrol illegally stopped and boxed in a woman at night, masked and armed, surrounding her car with no reason at all. She asked calmly, “Why am I being detained?” The agent refused to answer and instead demanded her ID, insisting, “You need a license to operate a vehicle… do you have ID?” She offered to hand over her ID once they explained why she was being stopped. They refused. She even suggested they run her license plates… they’re under her name… to verify who she is. Still, they ignored her and continued pressuring her. Then one agent said, “She’s a time waster. Get the fuck… get rid of her.” Imagine being a young woman, alone in your car, surrounded by masked men, hearing that. The fear, intimidation, and abuse of power were real… and completely unjustified. This was not policing. It was harassment, racial profiling, and blatant abuse of authority. No probable cause. No legal justification. Just a terrifying show of force. Film ICE whenever you see them. Protect yourself.
1:51

🚨 This is horrifying… In the Chicago suburbs, ICE/Border Patrol illegally stopped and boxed in a woman at night, masked and armed, surrounding her car with no reason at all. She asked calmly, “Why am I being detained?” The agent refused to answer and instead demanded her ID, insisting, “You need a license to operate a vehicle… do you have ID?” She offered to hand over her ID once they explained why she was being stopped. They refused. She even suggested they run her license plates… they’re under her name… to verify who she is. Still, they ignored her and continued pressuring her. Then one agent said, “She’s a time waster. Get the fuck… get rid of her.” Imagine being a young woman, alone in your car, surrounded by masked men, hearing that. The fear, intimidation, and abuse of power were real… and completely unjustified. This was not policing. It was harassment, racial profiling, and blatant abuse of authority. No probable cause. No legal justification. Just a terrifying show of force. Film ICE whenever you see them. Protect yourself.

Jesus Freakin Congress

426,379 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад

🚨ICE threatened to arrest a woman for obstruction… because she dared to stand on her own property and ask for a warrant in St. Paul, Minnesota. In the video, you can see ICE/Border Patrol agents terrorizing a residential neighborhood. A woman calmly asks to see a warrant as they invade her yard… which is her absolute right. Instead of producing one, they snap back that she is “obstructing” and threaten to arrest her… on her own lawn. They had no warrant. They had no right to be on her property. But they had no problem trying to intimidate a resident into silence. This is what unchecked federal power looks like… and it’s happening in broad daylight.
1:59

🚨ICE threatened to arrest a woman for obstruction… because she dared to stand on her own property and ask for a warrant in St. Paul, Minnesota. In the video, you can see ICE/Border Patrol agents terrorizing a residential neighborhood. A woman calmly asks to see a warrant as they invade her yard… which is her absolute right. Instead of producing one, they snap back that she is “obstructing” and threaten to arrest her… on her own lawn. They had no warrant. They had no right to be on her property. But they had no problem trying to intimidate a resident into silence. This is what unchecked federal power looks like… and it’s happening in broad daylight.

Jesus Freakin Congress

83,396 просмотров • 7 месяцев назад

ICE lies about their identity to violently detain mother—even though she carries green card at all times. "You lied to me when you said you were police!" she yells. "Who are you? Why pull me over?" "They put their knees on top of me, like three or four, and pulled me so hard." Agents eventually released Juanita Avila after admitting that they had no warrant for her arrest—and that she was in U.S. with a legal green card. But only because her daughter arrived on the scene to insist they check her pockets for paperwork. "Why were they hurting me, dragging me out of the car? Couldn’t they verify that I'm legal first, before doing that?" The incident occurred in Cottage Grove, Oregon. #DemsUnited
1:32

ICE lies about their identity to violently detain mother—even though she carries green card at all times. "You lied to me when you said you were police!" she yells. "Who are you? Why pull me over?" "They put their knees on top of me, like three or four, and pulled me so hard." Agents eventually released Juanita Avila after admitting that they had no warrant for her arrest—and that she was in U.S. with a legal green card. But only because her daughter arrived on the scene to insist they check her pockets for paperwork. "Why were they hurting me, dragging me out of the car? Couldn’t they verify that I'm legal first, before doing that?" The incident occurred in Cottage Grove, Oregon. #DemsUnited

LongTime🤓FirstTime👨‍💻

26,715 просмотров • 8 месяцев назад

JUST IN: Witness to the Minneapolis shooting tells CNN that an "ICE convoy" was stuck in the road and the woman who was shot blocked traffic so "they couldn't progress." The witness blasted ICE, calling them "children." "I heard whistles, which is a common sign that ICE is nearby." "But there was an ICE convoy that seemed to be stuck. And then there was a protester who was blocking traffic, so they couldn't progress. And, she was totally peaceful." "They were screaming at her to move, move, move. And then they approached her vehicle aggressively and tried to open her door." "And then that's when she got spooked, and she reversed her vehicle."
5:36

JUST IN: Witness to the Minneapolis shooting tells CNN that an "ICE convoy" was stuck in the road and the woman who was shot blocked traffic so "they couldn't progress." The witness blasted ICE, calling them "children." "I heard whistles, which is a common sign that ICE is nearby." "But there was an ICE convoy that seemed to be stuck. And then there was a protester who was blocking traffic, so they couldn't progress. And, she was totally peaceful." "They were screaming at her to move, move, move. And then they approached her vehicle aggressively and tried to open her door." "And then that's when she got spooked, and she reversed her vehicle."

Collin Rugg

2,003,986 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад

This woman walked into this ice cream shop and ordered an ice cream cone. When they handed it to her she told them she couldn’t pay for it. 😳 The employees said she had to pay for it. She didn’t have any money. She asks them if they are going to call the cops. This male customer sitting there chimes in and says if they call the cops he will be a witness. The woman said she told them she wanted it for free but the man said that’s not true. He said he watched her the whole time. She tries to put it down on the countertop but the employee tells her don’t leave it there. So she walks over and throws it in the trash. The witness tells her “this is what entitlement looks like” as she walks out the door. Some people said why not just buy the ice cream for her, to have a heart, because you never know what someone is going through. Others said if she had asked the right way and told them up front she didn’t have any money then maybe they would have purchased it for her but to come in and order and THEN tell them you don’t have any money is just wrong. This wasn’t a steak or a burger or a meal, I could see buying her those things to help someone out that is hungry but an ice cream is not a necessity. No one owes anyone anything. What do you think? Should one of them have bought the ice cream for her, given it to her for free? Or do you think she was trying to get something for free and trying to take advantage of them?
1:43

This woman walked into this ice cream shop and ordered an ice cream cone. When they handed it to her she told them she couldn’t pay for it. 😳 The employees said she had to pay for it. She didn’t have any money. She asks them if they are going to call the cops. This male customer sitting there chimes in and says if they call the cops he will be a witness. The woman said she told them she wanted it for free but the man said that’s not true. He said he watched her the whole time. She tries to put it down on the countertop but the employee tells her don’t leave it there. So she walks over and throws it in the trash. The witness tells her “this is what entitlement looks like” as she walks out the door. Some people said why not just buy the ice cream for her, to have a heart, because you never know what someone is going through. Others said if she had asked the right way and told them up front she didn’t have any money then maybe they would have purchased it for her but to come in and order and THEN tell them you don’t have any money is just wrong. This wasn’t a steak or a burger or a meal, I could see buying her those things to help someone out that is hungry but an ice cream is not a necessity. No one owes anyone anything. What do you think? Should one of them have bought the ice cream for her, given it to her for free? Or do you think she was trying to get something for free and trying to take advantage of them?

👉M-Û-R-Č-H👈

1,232,486 просмотров • 29 дней назад

🚨BREAKING: ICE agents surrounded the WRONG HOUSE for NINE HOURS… got a warrant… and still arrested the wrong person. They were looking for Gerson Manuel Portillo-Escobar, a human trafficking suspect who lived at 919 Hamilton Crossings Station, Antioch, Tennessee. Instead, they targeted someone at 939… a completely different home… and arrested Miguel Antonio Blanco, who has no criminal record. Agents saw Miguel go inside his own house and decided he was their suspect… Even though they had the correct name, address, and a photo of the actual person, who lived a few houses away. Miguel told them repeatedly they had the wrong person. They ignored him. For nine hours, they called out someone else’s name and tried to get inside. Then, they got a warrant… forced entry… and took a man who wasn’t on that warrant. This is a Fourth Amendment violation… you can’t have probable cause if you have the wrong person and the wrong house. It also raises due process concerns under the Fifth Amendment… because the government doesn’t get to ignore facts and detain someone anyway. They had the right information… They just didn’t use it.
1:33

🚨BREAKING: ICE agents surrounded the WRONG HOUSE for NINE HOURS… got a warrant… and still arrested the wrong person. They were looking for Gerson Manuel Portillo-Escobar, a human trafficking suspect who lived at 919 Hamilton Crossings Station, Antioch, Tennessee. Instead, they targeted someone at 939… a completely different home… and arrested Miguel Antonio Blanco, who has no criminal record. Agents saw Miguel go inside his own house and decided he was their suspect… Even though they had the correct name, address, and a photo of the actual person, who lived a few houses away. Miguel told them repeatedly they had the wrong person. They ignored him. For nine hours, they called out someone else’s name and tried to get inside. Then, they got a warrant… forced entry… and took a man who wasn’t on that warrant. This is a Fourth Amendment violation… you can’t have probable cause if you have the wrong person and the wrong house. It also raises due process concerns under the Fifth Amendment… because the government doesn’t get to ignore facts and detain someone anyway. They had the right information… They just didn’t use it.

Jesus Freakin Congress

267,553 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

A woman and her friend were visiting NYC to do some sight seeing and enjoy the local cuisine, they checked into the hotel for the weekend. They were gone all afternoon, and they came back around 5:00 pm. When she got back she found a notice saying they were being charged $500 for a smoking fee. She immediately went downstairs spoke to a manager. He showed her a report that claimed someone was smoking at 4:30pm which was possible because they weren’t even there and have proof. He told her that there was nothing he could do and that she needs to just dispute it with the bank. Since he refused to heck the cameras or card key logs to prove they weren’t there, is it possible that they the hotel is scamming her and her friend?
3:39

A woman and her friend were visiting NYC to do some sight seeing and enjoy the local cuisine, they checked into the hotel for the weekend. They were gone all afternoon, and they came back around 5:00 pm. When she got back she found a notice saying they were being charged $500 for a smoking fee. She immediately went downstairs spoke to a manager. He showed her a report that claimed someone was smoking at 4:30pm which was possible because they weren’t even there and have proof. He told her that there was nothing he could do and that she needs to just dispute it with the bank. Since he refused to heck the cameras or card key logs to prove they weren’t there, is it possible that they the hotel is scamming her and her friend?

SonnyBoy🇺🇸

1,889,136 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

This woman checked her camera and saw that another woman came and stole her whole gate for her fence. She drove around the neighborhood and found the car and the gate. She ended up calling the police and when the police arrive, the first thing they ask her to do is to show the video. She took offense at first because she thought they didn’t believe her. Turns out they did believe her, they just thought the whole thing was so unbelievable they wanted to see it too. After they all had their laugh they went and helped her get her fence back. This ended well for her but do you think it was wrong they wanted to see the video for their laugh first?
3:00

This woman checked her camera and saw that another woman came and stole her whole gate for her fence. She drove around the neighborhood and found the car and the gate. She ended up calling the police and when the police arrive, the first thing they ask her to do is to show the video. She took offense at first because she thought they didn’t believe her. Turns out they did believe her, they just thought the whole thing was so unbelievable they wanted to see it too. After they all had their laugh they went and helped her get her fence back. This ended well for her but do you think it was wrong they wanted to see the video for their laugh first?

SonnyBoy🇺🇸

410,853 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

A man gets a call in the middle of the night from his wife. She’s driving home from work and she noticed a law enforcement officer has been following her. They ended up following for over 20 minutes, right before she makes one of her final turns to get home. The lights come on and the officer pulls her over. I always thought that they weren’t allowed to follow you over a set number of miles. That it would entrapment. But it turned out to be a state officer, so that would make sense that they could follow from another city, but if they had cause when they followed, wouldn’t they have stopped her then?
1:20

A man gets a call in the middle of the night from his wife. She’s driving home from work and she noticed a law enforcement officer has been following her. They ended up following for over 20 minutes, right before she makes one of her final turns to get home. The lights come on and the officer pulls her over. I always thought that they weren’t allowed to follow you over a set number of miles. That it would entrapment. But it turned out to be a state officer, so that would make sense that they could follow from another city, but if they had cause when they followed, wouldn’t they have stopped her then?

SonnyBoy🇺🇸

1,327,282 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад