Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

На главную

Joe Borelli: “Well, let's be clear. Benny Johnson's right. [Alex Pretti’s] a violent psychopath who was h*ll bent on attacking federal law enforcement. We just saw that on video. I mean, he clearly spit at the law enforcement officer. He clearly was doing some sort of jujitsu kicks against...

RedWavePress's profile picture

RedWave Press

216,952 subscribers

116,949 просмотров • 8 месяцев назад •via X (Twitter)

ЮморНовости и политикаОбразование
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

Комментарии: 0

Нет доступных комментариев

Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста

Похожие видео

Joe Borelli: “Are you allowed to interfere with law enforcement?… If he would've stood on the sidewalk with a sign or with a camera, he would not be dead right now. But that's not what he did. He interfered with law enforcement.” Abby Phillip: “What was it about his conduct that you think was illegal or whatever it was?” Joe Borelli: “In close proximity, in contact with a law enforcement official.” Abby Phillip: “ But is he allowed to record what law enforcement is doing?” Joe Borelli: “Yes, from a safe distance. You're not allowed to actually be—“ Abby Phillip: “Okay. So, based on the video that you saw, was he at a safe distance?” Joe Borelli: “No... and he should have complied [with law enforcement].” Correct!
0:49

Joe Borelli: “Are you allowed to interfere with law enforcement?… If he would've stood on the sidewalk with a sign or with a camera, he would not be dead right now. But that's not what he did. He interfered with law enforcement.” Abby Phillip: “What was it about his conduct that you think was illegal or whatever it was?” Joe Borelli: “In close proximity, in contact with a law enforcement official.” Abby Phillip: “ But is he allowed to record what law enforcement is doing?” Joe Borelli: “Yes, from a safe distance. You're not allowed to actually be—“ Abby Phillip: “Okay. So, based on the video that you saw, was he at a safe distance?” Joe Borelli: “No... and he should have complied [with law enforcement].” Correct!

RedWave Press

108,560 просмотров • 8 месяцев назад

VP VANCE: "The precedent here is very simple. You have a federal law enforcement official engaging in federal law enforcement action. That's a federal issue." "That guy is protected by absolute immunity. He was doing his job." "The idea that Tim Walz and a bunch of radicals in Minneapolis are going to go after and make this guy's life miserable because he was doing the job that he was asked to do is preposterous."
0:53

VP VANCE: "The precedent here is very simple. You have a federal law enforcement official engaging in federal law enforcement action. That's a federal issue." "That guy is protected by absolute immunity. He was doing his job." "The idea that Tim Walz and a bunch of radicals in Minneapolis are going to go after and make this guy's life miserable because he was doing the job that he was asked to do is preposterous."

Fox News

166,538 просмотров • 8 месяцев назад

This Saturday, July 1, a law goes into effect that allows permitless carry of concealed weapons in FL. Get the facts. The new law does not change who can own a gun or where you can carry a firearm. Permitless carry is NOT open carry. Be informed, and be a responsible gun owner.
1:29

This Saturday, July 1, a law goes into effect that allows permitless carry of concealed weapons in FL. Get the facts. The new law does not change who can own a gun or where you can carry a firearm. Permitless carry is NOT open carry. Be informed, and be a responsible gun owner.

Orange County Sheriff's Office

52,985 просмотров • 3 лет назад

BASH: “So are you saying it's not okay for him to exercise his Second Amendment right – not to mention his First Amendment right to be there in the first place – but his Second Amendment right to carry a gun? And if you do, you can be shot by federal law enforcement?” BOVINO: "No, I didn't say that, Dana. I never said that. What I'm saying is we respect that Second Amendment right. But those rights don't count when you riot and assault, delay, obstruct and impede law enforcement officers."
1:34

BASH: “So are you saying it's not okay for him to exercise his Second Amendment right – not to mention his First Amendment right to be there in the first place – but his Second Amendment right to carry a gun? And if you do, you can be shot by federal law enforcement?” BOVINO: "No, I didn't say that, Dana. I never said that. What I'm saying is we respect that Second Amendment right. But those rights don't count when you riot and assault, delay, obstruct and impede law enforcement officers."

State of the Union

37,354 просмотров • 8 месяцев назад

Abby Phillip: “Scott, what was Pretti doing in the moment that he was assaulted by assault ICE officer?” Scott Jennings: “I mean, he was engaging with law enforcement officers. He was within inches of them.” Abby Phillip: “No, he wasn’t.” Scott Jennings: “Yes, he was. There was a scrum.” Abby Phillip: “What exactly was he doing?” Scott Jennings: “He was engaging in the middle of a law enforcement situation.” “My only point is that you have ordinary people who are being trained or instructed to go into the middle of active law enforcement zones, and that is extremely unwise. It's extremely unwise.” Exactly!
1:29

Abby Phillip: “Scott, what was Pretti doing in the moment that he was assaulted by assault ICE officer?” Scott Jennings: “I mean, he was engaging with law enforcement officers. He was within inches of them.” Abby Phillip: “No, he wasn’t.” Scott Jennings: “Yes, he was. There was a scrum.” Abby Phillip: “What exactly was he doing?” Scott Jennings: “He was engaging in the middle of a law enforcement situation.” “My only point is that you have ordinary people who are being trained or instructed to go into the middle of active law enforcement zones, and that is extremely unwise. It's extremely unwise.” Exactly!

RedWave Press

83,667 просмотров • 8 месяцев назад

Bret Weinstein on Alex Pretti's Reckless Gun Behavior "I want people not to focus so much on the details of the firearm as the analysis from the perspective of somebody who has been involved in these discussions about how how to think about firearms and behavior in a safe way. There are numerous things here, which I would say he is legally entitled to do, but I would regard as reckless and I don't mean legally reckless, I mean reckless in the common parlance sense of the term. He's carrying a loaded firearm into a zone of conflict with armed federal officers. I wouldn't do that. If I was... let's say that's not a decision he made, maybe he happened there by accident and somehow was not focused on the fact that "hey I need to be extra careful and not go this direction, because I'm armed and it could get bad," but then he steps in as the officer is behaving, I think in an illegitimate way towards this woman. Right, this officer shoves this woman to the ground and Pretti steps in. I would argue that's reckless if you're armed the way he is because of exactly the sort of thing that unfolds. I don't know that he had one in the chamber, because I don't know that his gun went off, but if the gun went off it says he had one in the chamber and I would say wow, that's really reckless especially with that gun."
5:15

Bret Weinstein on Alex Pretti's Reckless Gun Behavior "I want people not to focus so much on the details of the firearm as the analysis from the perspective of somebody who has been involved in these discussions about how how to think about firearms and behavior in a safe way. There are numerous things here, which I would say he is legally entitled to do, but I would regard as reckless and I don't mean legally reckless, I mean reckless in the common parlance sense of the term. He's carrying a loaded firearm into a zone of conflict with armed federal officers. I wouldn't do that. If I was... let's say that's not a decision he made, maybe he happened there by accident and somehow was not focused on the fact that "hey I need to be extra careful and not go this direction, because I'm armed and it could get bad," but then he steps in as the officer is behaving, I think in an illegitimate way towards this woman. Right, this officer shoves this woman to the ground and Pretti steps in. I would argue that's reckless if you're armed the way he is because of exactly the sort of thing that unfolds. I don't know that he had one in the chamber, because I don't know that his gun went off, but if the gun went off it says he had one in the chamber and I would say wow, that's really reckless especially with that gun."

The DarkHorse Podcast

104,144 просмотров • 8 месяцев назад

Some on the Left are now arguing that the Second Amendment somehow justifies physically interfering with law enforcement. That is not what the Constitution says. At all. Let me set the record straight. You absolutely have the right to carry a gun. Period. Full stop. You do not have the right to act in ways that are irresponsible or harmful to others, especially law enforcement. I really thought this was obvious, but in order to try and drive the message home to as many people as possible, this clip from my townhall is followed by a PSA. Stay strapped. Stay calm. Stay alive. Don’t fight the police.
1:11

Some on the Left are now arguing that the Second Amendment somehow justifies physically interfering with law enforcement. That is not what the Constitution says. At all. Let me set the record straight. You absolutely have the right to carry a gun. Period. Full stop. You do not have the right to act in ways that are irresponsible or harmful to others, especially law enforcement. I really thought this was obvious, but in order to try and drive the message home to as many people as possible, this clip from my townhall is followed by a PSA. Stay strapped. Stay calm. Stay alive. Don’t fight the police.

Dan Crenshaw

35,249 просмотров • 8 месяцев назад

BREAKING: Greg Bovino blatantly tries to create a bogus narrative over ICE's murder of Alex Pretti in Minneapolis, Minnesota today. He seemingly claims that because Pretti had a gun in his waist-ban (legally), it can be assumed that he wanted to "massacre law enforcement," and that gave ICE a right to shoot and kill him. Where are all of the Pro-Second Amendment people? You've gone from being against creating larger restrictions for guns to suddenly cheering on as law-enforcement kills somebody merely for legally owning a gun? It's clear as day in the videos that the officer took the gun from Pretti before he was shot multiple times and killed. This is murder!
0:35

BREAKING: Greg Bovino blatantly tries to create a bogus narrative over ICE's murder of Alex Pretti in Minneapolis, Minnesota today. He seemingly claims that because Pretti had a gun in his waist-ban (legally), it can be assumed that he wanted to "massacre law enforcement," and that gave ICE a right to shoot and kill him. Where are all of the Pro-Second Amendment people? You've gone from being against creating larger restrictions for guns to suddenly cheering on as law-enforcement kills somebody merely for legally owning a gun? It's clear as day in the videos that the officer took the gun from Pretti before he was shot multiple times and killed. This is murder!

Ed Krassenstein

842,221 просмотров • 8 месяцев назад

REPORTER: "You just made claims that the individual posed a threat to law enforcement..." SEC NOEM: "That is no claim. It is the facts." "...This individual showed up to a law enforcement operation with a weapon and dozens of rounds of ammunition. He wasn't there to peacefully protest. He was there to perpetuate violence." "And he was asked to show up, and to continue to resist, by a governor who is irresponsible and has a long history of corruption and lying."
0:49

REPORTER: "You just made claims that the individual posed a threat to law enforcement..." SEC NOEM: "That is no claim. It is the facts." "...This individual showed up to a law enforcement operation with a weapon and dozens of rounds of ammunition. He wasn't there to peacefully protest. He was there to perpetuate violence." "And he was asked to show up, and to continue to resist, by a governor who is irresponsible and has a long history of corruption and lying."

Fox News

2,671,544 просмотров • 8 месяцев назад

This is the only part that wasn’t clear… We need to know more about this Discord conversation and who he was talking to about a “drop point” for a gun. Does it sound like he was talking to his roommate about placing the gun, or someone else? If the roommate… why is the roomate not charged?
1:07

This is the only part that wasn’t clear… We need to know more about this Discord conversation and who he was talking to about a “drop point” for a gun. Does it sound like he was talking to his roommate about placing the gun, or someone else? If the roommate… why is the roomate not charged?

MJTruthUltra

131,769 просмотров • 1 год назад

Clarence Thomas explained the Second Amendment in one sentence. And every politician who talks about what gun rights they are willing to “let” you keep should hear it. The Second Amendment does not grant the right. It assumes the right already exists. That means the government does not give you the right to keep and bear arms. The amendment tells the government what it cannot do to a right you already had. Rights first. Government second. That is the order. And once you understand that, every gun law looks different. Because now the government is the one that has to explain itself. Not you. Then Thomas tells a story about Justice Breyer asking what he would do if a man with a machete walked up on his porch demanding money. Thomas’s answer? He would be cleaning his guns. That is why this clip hits different. He does not just rule on the Second Amendment. He understands it. He lives it. And he connects it to the history most gun control speeches leave out: The 14th Amendment. Freed slaves. The right to defend yourself from people trying to kill you. Because a citizen who cannot protect his own life does not stay a citizen for very long. Do you think most politicians understand the Second Amendment, or do they just talk around it? Shop the America Hat here:
2:26

Clarence Thomas explained the Second Amendment in one sentence. And every politician who talks about what gun rights they are willing to “let” you keep should hear it. The Second Amendment does not grant the right. It assumes the right already exists. That means the government does not give you the right to keep and bear arms. The amendment tells the government what it cannot do to a right you already had. Rights first. Government second. That is the order. And once you understand that, every gun law looks different. Because now the government is the one that has to explain itself. Not you. Then Thomas tells a story about Justice Breyer asking what he would do if a man with a machete walked up on his porch demanding money. Thomas’s answer? He would be cleaning his guns. That is why this clip hits different. He does not just rule on the Second Amendment. He understands it. He lives it. And he connects it to the history most gun control speeches leave out: The 14th Amendment. Freed slaves. The right to defend yourself from people trying to kill you. Because a citizen who cannot protect his own life does not stay a citizen for very long. Do you think most politicians understand the Second Amendment, or do they just talk around it? Shop the America Hat here:

Colion Noir

108,813 просмотров • 19 дней назад

Tucker Carlson: Remembering Charlie Kirk - A Life of Faith and Courage "Quickly about Charlie, I've known him since he was a teenager, and just an amazing person, but the two things that stick out, he's a Christian man. We talked about that a lot, including, you know, just the other day. There's a lot of pressure on public people, people who run huge, you know, hundred million dollar a year non-profits, and there are a lot of pitfalls and traps." "That's why so many of them are destroyed, and Charlie really did, without, you know, betraying details, like he walked the line for real. It was the topic of many conversations between us, because I've seen so many people destroyed. You know, most people are destroyed by power, and he wasn't, and I just really admire that." "I mean, to his last moments, you know, in order, he cared about God, his wife, and his children, and then his country. So, and that was totally real, completely real. I can affirm that, because I just talked to him about it so much, and I admire that, and he's a model, really." "I mean, he didn't have hate in his heart, and it was funny, and again, it's one of the reasons I couldn't stop looking at these videos last night. People were describing the opposite of what he was. He was filled with hate." "No, and if you talked to him about people who had attacked him, or who were truly his enemies, up to, and I think including the people who assassinated him yesterday, he would never, ever express hate, ever. He would always turn to, no, this person has been led astray. This person is clearly possessed by dark forces." "This person is a perpetrator, but also a victim of evil. I mean, that really was his worldview. That's the Christian worldview, and he expressed that in public, and especially in private, and I think that faith, which was completely real, not the fake faith that you see on display so often, but a real one, that was the root of his courage, and he had real courage." "He loved being with people who disagreed with him, not theoretically with them, but physically with them, you know, like close enough to smell. He would wait right in the middle of everything. I mean, I could tell you a million stories that I saw, but that was absolutely real." "Like, he loved people, even people who hated him, and people he loved, he was the rare person who was willing to tell them what he thought was true. I mean, he really believed, as a political matter, by the way, that, you know, I don't think he had animus toward anybody in no other country, but he really believed in his own country, and the obligation of his government to stand behind his country. He was truly America first in the nicest, most decent, non-ideological, but sincere way." "He was one of the only people, I mean, truly one of the only people to go to the president, whom he loved. He loved Donald Trump, like, personally as well, and I think the president really loved him in a real way, but he was one of the only people to go to the Oval Office and say, sir, I totally understand, and think Iran's really bad, but a war with Iran is not, you know, is something that could really hurt our country. I mean, boy, that was an unpopular position." "He didn't need to express it. Oh, of course, and he did it again. He didn't have some weird agenda. He wasn't mad at anybody. He was for his country, and he was for doing the right and wise and difficult thing, and he said that. He went to the Oval Office to say that." "He took massive, massive abuse from his own donors, which is also something that you don't see. He was one of the very few people, very few people I have met who combined a, like, a love for everyone involved with strong views. So, again, he was not animated by anything creepy or weird." "I mean, you knew him intimately, so you know this is true. If you talked to him off camera, he would say, you know, I really, like, I love whoever I'm talking about, but I think this is wrong. It's immoral." "It's bad for everybody involved, both sides, and he would say that, and he could say that because it was sincere. It was completely sincere, but I cannot overstate the amount of attacks he took privately over this, like, absolutely for real, and having lived in Washington most of my life and seen people run non-profits, I've never met one who was willing, stand up is too strong. He wasn't confrontational, but he would just say, no, I'm sorry that you feel that way, but I think this is the right thing." "The people we represent, which is mostly young people, they believe this, and I believe it also. It was brave, but loving at the same time, and I'm not sure he made a lot of headway, by the way. I mean, I think he made real enemies in doing that, but his view didn't change." "Anyway, he's just a wonderfully decent, loving man. That is true."
4:27

Tucker Carlson: Remembering Charlie Kirk - A Life of Faith and Courage "Quickly about Charlie, I've known him since he was a teenager, and just an amazing person, but the two things that stick out, he's a Christian man. We talked about that a lot, including, you know, just the other day. There's a lot of pressure on public people, people who run huge, you know, hundred million dollar a year non-profits, and there are a lot of pitfalls and traps." "That's why so many of them are destroyed, and Charlie really did, without, you know, betraying details, like he walked the line for real. It was the topic of many conversations between us, because I've seen so many people destroyed. You know, most people are destroyed by power, and he wasn't, and I just really admire that." "I mean, to his last moments, you know, in order, he cared about God, his wife, and his children, and then his country. So, and that was totally real, completely real. I can affirm that, because I just talked to him about it so much, and I admire that, and he's a model, really." "I mean, he didn't have hate in his heart, and it was funny, and again, it's one of the reasons I couldn't stop looking at these videos last night. People were describing the opposite of what he was. He was filled with hate." "No, and if you talked to him about people who had attacked him, or who were truly his enemies, up to, and I think including the people who assassinated him yesterday, he would never, ever express hate, ever. He would always turn to, no, this person has been led astray. This person is clearly possessed by dark forces." "This person is a perpetrator, but also a victim of evil. I mean, that really was his worldview. That's the Christian worldview, and he expressed that in public, and especially in private, and I think that faith, which was completely real, not the fake faith that you see on display so often, but a real one, that was the root of his courage, and he had real courage." "He loved being with people who disagreed with him, not theoretically with them, but physically with them, you know, like close enough to smell. He would wait right in the middle of everything. I mean, I could tell you a million stories that I saw, but that was absolutely real." "Like, he loved people, even people who hated him, and people he loved, he was the rare person who was willing to tell them what he thought was true. I mean, he really believed, as a political matter, by the way, that, you know, I don't think he had animus toward anybody in no other country, but he really believed in his own country, and the obligation of his government to stand behind his country. He was truly America first in the nicest, most decent, non-ideological, but sincere way." "He was one of the only people, I mean, truly one of the only people to go to the president, whom he loved. He loved Donald Trump, like, personally as well, and I think the president really loved him in a real way, but he was one of the only people to go to the Oval Office and say, sir, I totally understand, and think Iran's really bad, but a war with Iran is not, you know, is something that could really hurt our country. I mean, boy, that was an unpopular position." "He didn't need to express it. Oh, of course, and he did it again. He didn't have some weird agenda. He wasn't mad at anybody. He was for his country, and he was for doing the right and wise and difficult thing, and he said that. He went to the Oval Office to say that." "He took massive, massive abuse from his own donors, which is also something that you don't see. He was one of the very few people, very few people I have met who combined a, like, a love for everyone involved with strong views. So, again, he was not animated by anything creepy or weird." "I mean, you knew him intimately, so you know this is true. If you talked to him off camera, he would say, you know, I really, like, I love whoever I'm talking about, but I think this is wrong. It's immoral." "It's bad for everybody involved, both sides, and he would say that, and he could say that because it was sincere. It was completely sincere, but I cannot overstate the amount of attacks he took privately over this, like, absolutely for real, and having lived in Washington most of my life and seen people run non-profits, I've never met one who was willing, stand up is too strong. He wasn't confrontational, but he would just say, no, I'm sorry that you feel that way, but I think this is the right thing." "The people we represent, which is mostly young people, they believe this, and I believe it also. It was brave, but loving at the same time, and I'm not sure he made a lot of headway, by the way. I mean, I think he made real enemies in doing that, but his view didn't change." "Anyway, he's just a wonderfully decent, loving man. That is true."

Camus

41,966 просмотров • 1 год назад

Denzel Washington’s epic monologue towards the end of Training Day was largely improvised on set. Director Antoine Fuqua was so blown away by his performance, he says he thinks he "forgot to yell cut”. He explains… “That’s Denzel. He was just in his zone. I mean, that was one of those moment...people talk about AI. Those are the moments where you go...it's a great tool. It's gonna be a great tool, I think...but the emotion, and the moment that an actor can bring - you can't predict that. That's something that's just inside of Denzel. And when that came out, I was just like - I hope I got it. I just turned to my operator - who was shaking- I looked over at the guy - I was like, “please tell me you got that.” Because that was the take. That was it. There was no other take - I mean, how do you tell an actor like that, that that wasn't good enough? …He walked over to me, and he just had this look in his eyes. I was like, “you good?” He said, “you good?” I said, “Yeah…” Some of that was in the script, but he flipped it the way he did it. "Putting cases on all you." He kind of added some things in there. And then he just went into a whole other zone with the whole King Kong thing- with Pelican Bay - Denzel started that. That was Denzel. That was him, man. He just kind of lit up, and I think I forgot to yell cut. I was just watching it, because everybody started walking away, and I'm just watching him, and then he lights a cigarette - and he's talking - and I'm just watching him. I think at some point he probably looked at me like, you going to cut? And I'm like, “oh yeah, yeah, cut.” He was still in it. That's the thing with Denzel. He was so Alonso…I'm just watching him for a while because I didn't know what else he was going to do. It was just so magical. And then I think he looked up at me and I was like, “Okay, cut, cut.”
2:31

Denzel Washington’s epic monologue towards the end of Training Day was largely improvised on set. Director Antoine Fuqua was so blown away by his performance, he says he thinks he "forgot to yell cut”. He explains… “That’s Denzel. He was just in his zone. I mean, that was one of those moment...people talk about AI. Those are the moments where you go...it's a great tool. It's gonna be a great tool, I think...but the emotion, and the moment that an actor can bring - you can't predict that. That's something that's just inside of Denzel. And when that came out, I was just like - I hope I got it. I just turned to my operator - who was shaking- I looked over at the guy - I was like, “please tell me you got that.” Because that was the take. That was it. There was no other take - I mean, how do you tell an actor like that, that that wasn't good enough? …He walked over to me, and he just had this look in his eyes. I was like, “you good?” He said, “you good?” I said, “Yeah…” Some of that was in the script, but he flipped it the way he did it. "Putting cases on all you." He kind of added some things in there. And then he just went into a whole other zone with the whole King Kong thing- with Pelican Bay - Denzel started that. That was Denzel. That was him, man. He just kind of lit up, and I think I forgot to yell cut. I was just watching it, because everybody started walking away, and I'm just watching him, and then he lights a cigarette - and he's talking - and I'm just watching him. I think at some point he probably looked at me like, you going to cut? And I'm like, “oh yeah, yeah, cut.” He was still in it. That's the thing with Denzel. He was so Alonso…I'm just watching him for a while because I didn't know what else he was going to do. It was just so magical. And then I think he looked up at me and I was like, “Okay, cut, cut.”

Gangster Cinema Central

42,262 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

Quentin Tarantino says armorers should be 90% responsible and actors 10% responsible for gun safety on movie sets “It's a situation I think I'm being fair enough to say that the armorer, the guy who handles the gun, is 90% responsible for everything that happens when it comes to that gun” “But the actor is 10% responsible. It's a gun. You are a partner in the responsibility to some degree. They show it to you. If there's steps to go through, you go through them, and it's done with due diligence. You know it's fucking for real” “If he went through the steps that he's supposed to go through, then he should... it's like, okay, you see the barrel is clear. They show you that the barrel is clear, that there's not anything wedged in the barrel. You look at it. They show you some version of, ‘Here are our blanks and here's the gun.’ Now you're ready to go” “If an actor knows he has three hot rounds in his gun and he knows, ‘Okay, I'm going to do a scene and at this point, bam, bam, bam... If one of the rounds doesn't go off while he does his bam, bam, bam, he should cut the scene and say, ‘Guys, one of the rounds didn't go off. I think I'm still holding a hot gun here’”
2:11

Quentin Tarantino says armorers should be 90% responsible and actors 10% responsible for gun safety on movie sets “It's a situation I think I'm being fair enough to say that the armorer, the guy who handles the gun, is 90% responsible for everything that happens when it comes to that gun” “But the actor is 10% responsible. It's a gun. You are a partner in the responsibility to some degree. They show it to you. If there's steps to go through, you go through them, and it's done with due diligence. You know it's fucking for real” “If he went through the steps that he's supposed to go through, then he should... it's like, okay, you see the barrel is clear. They show you that the barrel is clear, that there's not anything wedged in the barrel. You look at it. They show you some version of, ‘Here are our blanks and here's the gun.’ Now you're ready to go” “If an actor knows he has three hot rounds in his gun and he knows, ‘Okay, I'm going to do a scene and at this point, bam, bam, bam... If one of the rounds doesn't go off while he does his bam, bam, bam, he should cut the scene and say, ‘Guys, one of the rounds didn't go off. I think I'm still holding a hot gun here’”

dank

363,695 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

Q: That man works for you now, right? The one who was in the police body cam footage, the one allegedly yelling 'kill him' at officers on January 6th Bondi: He does work for us Q: This is who you choose as the chief law enforcement officer of the US to hire? Bondi: He was pardoned by Trump
1:38

Q: That man works for you now, right? The one who was in the police body cam footage, the one allegedly yelling 'kill him' at officers on January 6th Bondi: He does work for us Q: This is who you choose as the chief law enforcement officer of the US to hire? Bondi: He was pardoned by Trump

Headquarters

75,908 просмотров • 7 месяцев назад

The facts of what happened in Minneapolis on Jan 7 matter: at 10:25 AM CT the individual in question was using her vehicle to block-in law enforcement officers and obstruct lawful operations—a felony. Throughout the course of the morning, the individual and her partner had been stalking, harassing and impeding law enforcement. ICE law enforcement approached the individual in question and gave repeated lawful commands to stop obstructing operations and then ordered her out of her vehicle for arrest. She refused to comply. She then proceeded to weaponize her vehicle, a deadly weapon, and hit a federal law enforcement officer. The ICE officer, fearing for his life, the lives of his fellow law enforcement, and the safety of the public, fired defensive shots. Peaceful protest is a sacred First Amendment right. This was not that. If you obstruct law enforcement operations, ignore lawful commands, and use a deadly weapon to kill or cause bodily harm to a federal law enforcement office there are dangerous, and in this case deadly, consequences. This was entirely preventable.
1:22

The facts of what happened in Minneapolis on Jan 7 matter: at 10:25 AM CT the individual in question was using her vehicle to block-in law enforcement officers and obstruct lawful operations—a felony. Throughout the course of the morning, the individual and her partner had been stalking, harassing and impeding law enforcement. ICE law enforcement approached the individual in question and gave repeated lawful commands to stop obstructing operations and then ordered her out of her vehicle for arrest. She refused to comply. She then proceeded to weaponize her vehicle, a deadly weapon, and hit a federal law enforcement officer. The ICE officer, fearing for his life, the lives of his fellow law enforcement, and the safety of the public, fired defensive shots. Peaceful protest is a sacred First Amendment right. This was not that. If you obstruct law enforcement operations, ignore lawful commands, and use a deadly weapon to kill or cause bodily harm to a federal law enforcement office there are dangerous, and in this case deadly, consequences. This was entirely preventable.

Tricia McLaughlin

126,529 просмотров • 8 месяцев назад

Trump: “I watched that pass that Messi made, not knowing as much as the people in this room, but I know about sorts and I know a little bit about soccer but I watched Messi, and he was well guarded, right? And all of a sudden he is standing on the right, you understand what I'm talking about? I don't know – I just noticed it. Nobody talked about it, I just noticed it. I said, he is too well guarded by a great player. And then he moved to the right and the other player was just standing there. "And he had plenty of time. He kicked it…. You have a great player in England, who I play golf with, you know that, right?… I think they perhaps made a mistake when they made him a defensive player, what do I know about soccer?…we've got to be a little offensive, right? But no, I'm not going to call it. Look, what do I know about coaching? But that was a little unusual."
1:21

Trump: “I watched that pass that Messi made, not knowing as much as the people in this room, but I know about sorts and I know a little bit about soccer but I watched Messi, and he was well guarded, right? And all of a sudden he is standing on the right, you understand what I'm talking about? I don't know – I just noticed it. Nobody talked about it, I just noticed it. I said, he is too well guarded by a great player. And then he moved to the right and the other player was just standing there. "And he had plenty of time. He kicked it…. You have a great player in England, who I play golf with, you know that, right?… I think they perhaps made a mistake when they made him a defensive player, what do I know about soccer?…we've got to be a little offensive, right? But no, I'm not going to call it. Look, what do I know about coaching? But that was a little unusual."

Republicans against Trump

763,853 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

WATCH: Scott Jennings introduces into CNN the idea of Alex Pretti et al being something significantly more than "anti-ICE protesters": "Yeah, look, I think the video that we've seen adds context to what he was probably doing over a period of time. I think the narrative has been that he was just an innocent protester or some sort of an observer. It's obvious he was part of some organized effort to show up where federal law enforcement was and engage in some way, whether that engagement was recording or blowing whistles or whatever, or in the video's case, kicking in the taillight of a car, he was obviously there to do something. That doesn't supersede the need to have an investigation of the shooting. I support an investigation of the shooting. I will say, I think the investigation needs to be holistic and I care more about just the shooting. I care about where did Alex Pretti come from, what part of what group was he in? Was he part of any kind of a training organization? I mean, I think what's going on in Minneapolis is more than just random people showing up to protest, I believe, and there's lots of evidence about this, that there are well organized, well trained and well-funded agitators who are showing up with the purpose of provoking these kinds of incidents so that they can then create the narrative that somehow ICE is out of control."
1:23

WATCH: Scott Jennings introduces into CNN the idea of Alex Pretti et al being something significantly more than "anti-ICE protesters": "Yeah, look, I think the video that we've seen adds context to what he was probably doing over a period of time. I think the narrative has been that he was just an innocent protester or some sort of an observer. It's obvious he was part of some organized effort to show up where federal law enforcement was and engage in some way, whether that engagement was recording or blowing whistles or whatever, or in the video's case, kicking in the taillight of a car, he was obviously there to do something. That doesn't supersede the need to have an investigation of the shooting. I support an investigation of the shooting. I will say, I think the investigation needs to be holistic and I care more about just the shooting. I care about where did Alex Pretti come from, what part of what group was he in? Was he part of any kind of a training organization? I mean, I think what's going on in Minneapolis is more than just random people showing up to protest, I believe, and there's lots of evidence about this, that there are well organized, well trained and well-funded agitators who are showing up with the purpose of provoking these kinds of incidents so that they can then create the narrative that somehow ICE is out of control."

Jorge Bonilla

318,445 просмотров • 8 месяцев назад

O'Hara: "There's folks that are masked, they're not sure if they're law enforcement, they may be kidnapping people. We have had those reports. The community should know that if you see something like that -- you don't know if someone is law enforcement -- you should call 911. Let's not forget -- we very recently had tragedy in this state by someone who was purporting to be law enforcement."
1:27

O'Hara: "There's folks that are masked, they're not sure if they're law enforcement, they may be kidnapping people. We have had those reports. The community should know that if you see something like that -- you don't know if someone is law enforcement -- you should call 911. Let's not forget -- we very recently had tragedy in this state by someone who was purporting to be law enforcement."

Aaron Rupar

352,088 просмотров • 10 месяцев назад

"Tell me about this man in Mexico." "Was he? What you needed?" "No. I mean, sort of But. "Did he hurt you?" "No. He just wasn't..." "Wasn't what?" "You. He wasn't you. "Was he the only one?" "There was a guy in L.A., "And that was it. Two guys. And you."
2:11

"Tell me about this man in Mexico." "Was he? What you needed?" "No. I mean, sort of But. "Did he hurt you?" "No. He just wasn't..." "Wasn't what?" "You. He wasn't you. "Was he the only one?" "There was a guy in L.A., "And that was it. Two guys. And you."

Bby

189,936 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад