Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

На главную

🇺🇸 NEW FOOTAGE SHOWS RENEE GOOD'S DANCING WHILE BLOCKING ICE OPERATION. THEN EVERYONE ACTS SURPRISED IT ENDED BADLY New footage circulating shows Renee Good's vehicle parked diagonally across Portland Avenue, deliberately blocking the road where ICE was conducting operations. Also she appears to be dancing while doing it, not...

MarioNawfal's profile picture

Mario Nawfal

3,342,055 subscribers

191,671 просмотров • 6 месяцев 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

🚨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

326,258 просмотров • 10 дней назад

Show this to anyone who says she didn’t hit the ice agent. .@Sec_Noem doubles down: In an evening press conference in Minneapolis, the DHS secretary both said the “tragedy” was “preventable” and accused the driver, who she did not name, of weaponizing her vehicle in an apparent act of domestic terrorism, and alleged that she “had been stalking and impeding” the work of ICE personnel “all throughout the day.” According to Noem: ICE agents repeatedly ordered her to get out of the car and to stop obstructing law enforcement, but she refused to obey their commands. She then proceeded to weaponize her vehicle, and she attempted to run a law enforcement officer over. This appears as an attempt to kill or to cause bodily harm to agents, an act of domestic terrorism. The ICE officer, fearing for his life and the other officers around him and the safety of the public, fired defensive shots. He used his training to save his own life and that of his colleagues. He was treated at a local hospital, has been released and is now with family.
0:12

Show this to anyone who says she didn’t hit the ice agent. .@Sec_Noem doubles down: In an evening press conference in Minneapolis, the DHS secretary both said the “tragedy” was “preventable” and accused the driver, who she did not name, of weaponizing her vehicle in an apparent act of domestic terrorism, and alleged that she “had been stalking and impeding” the work of ICE personnel “all throughout the day.” According to Noem: ICE agents repeatedly ordered her to get out of the car and to stop obstructing law enforcement, but she refused to obey their commands. She then proceeded to weaponize her vehicle, and she attempted to run a law enforcement officer over. This appears as an attempt to kill or to cause bodily harm to agents, an act of domestic terrorism. The ICE officer, fearing for his life and the other officers around him and the safety of the public, fired defensive shots. He used his training to save his own life and that of his colleagues. He was treated at a local hospital, has been released and is now with family.

🦅 Eagle Wings 🦅

134,959 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад

Here is the guy and the two ladies stopping traffic in the middle of the street. You can hear him yelling at the person in the white SUV. You can see the border patrol agents parked across the street in front of the place where they were going to arrest the criminal illegal alien and coming out of their cars. You can then see the two women go right towards the agent who was by his car and stand in front of him obstructing an active operation. It can't be seen in this video but we know from other videos that the guy went across the street to the area where the agents were. The two women and the guy all inserted themselves in an active operation. This is dangerous for officers and for the public. These officers have only a few minutes to get in there, execute the warrant, arrest the illegal alien (who may be armed since he is a criminal) and pull him out into their car. These people are going after these officers with loud whistles, blocking traffic, confronting them. The people out there applauding this behavior, saying that it is citizens' right to do that, or instigating it are putting civilians in danger.
0:10

Here is the guy and the two ladies stopping traffic in the middle of the street. You can hear him yelling at the person in the white SUV. You can see the border patrol agents parked across the street in front of the place where they were going to arrest the criminal illegal alien and coming out of their cars. You can then see the two women go right towards the agent who was by his car and stand in front of him obstructing an active operation. It can't be seen in this video but we know from other videos that the guy went across the street to the area where the agents were. The two women and the guy all inserted themselves in an active operation. This is dangerous for officers and for the public. These officers have only a few minutes to get in there, execute the warrant, arrest the illegal alien (who may be armed since he is a criminal) and pull him out into their car. These people are going after these officers with loud whistles, blocking traffic, confronting them. The people out there applauding this behavior, saying that it is citizens' right to do that, or instigating it are putting civilians in danger.

Dr. Maria Peiro 🇺🇸 🐊

158,356 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

🇺🇸 ELON BACKS ICE AFTER SHOOTING: “TRY TO KILL A LAW OFFICER WITH A CAR? SELF-DEFENSE IS OBVIOUS” Elon just threw his full support behind ICE after one of their agents was attacked in Minneapolis and forced to fire back. This morning, a 37-year-old woman ignored ICE commands to stop, then reportedly rammed her vehicle into an agent turning her car into a weapon, so the agent applied self-defense. Leftists are now rioting in the streets, screaming “Nazi” and calling for the agent’s arrest, but Elon isn't having it. He wrote “If an officer of law says stop, you stop"; simple. Basic. Something anyone with common sense can understand. Then he dropped the hammer: “Attempting to murder them with a car obviously requires self-defense". No sugar-coating, nor woke spin. If you try to kill a federal agent with a deadly weapon, in this case a moving vehicle, you better expect a response. Source: Eric Daugherty, Elon Musk
0:17

🇺🇸 ELON BACKS ICE AFTER SHOOTING: “TRY TO KILL A LAW OFFICER WITH A CAR? SELF-DEFENSE IS OBVIOUS” Elon just threw his full support behind ICE after one of their agents was attacked in Minneapolis and forced to fire back. This morning, a 37-year-old woman ignored ICE commands to stop, then reportedly rammed her vehicle into an agent turning her car into a weapon, so the agent applied self-defense. Leftists are now rioting in the streets, screaming “Nazi” and calling for the agent’s arrest, but Elon isn't having it. He wrote “If an officer of law says stop, you stop"; simple. Basic. Something anyone with common sense can understand. Then he dropped the hammer: “Attempting to murder them with a car obviously requires self-defense". No sugar-coating, nor woke spin. If you try to kill a federal agent with a deadly weapon, in this case a moving vehicle, you better expect a response. Source: Eric Daugherty, Elon Musk

Mario Nawfal

514,169 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад

NEW: Recently released January 6 footage shows one of the J6 protesters flashing something as he appears to be leaving the Capitol building. Many online are suggesting that the item he is holding is a badge and that he is a Federal agent. The man in the video is Kevin James Lyons and he was sentenced to over four years in prison. Lyons admitted to taking a wallet from then-Speaker Pelosi's staffer as well as a framed photo of Pelosi with late Congressman John Lewis. Lyons was an HVAC technician and was arrested in his home state of Illinois just one week after J6. On the evening of J6, Lyons shared a photo of the picture frame he took with his friends and said: "I'm pretty confident I am now a multiple Federal felon." It is very unlikely that the item he is holding is a badge and if it is, it is probably one that doesn't belong to him. Source assist: Brick Suit
0:13

NEW: Recently released January 6 footage shows one of the J6 protesters flashing something as he appears to be leaving the Capitol building. Many online are suggesting that the item he is holding is a badge and that he is a Federal agent. The man in the video is Kevin James Lyons and he was sentenced to over four years in prison. Lyons admitted to taking a wallet from then-Speaker Pelosi's staffer as well as a framed photo of Pelosi with late Congressman John Lewis. Lyons was an HVAC technician and was arrested in his home state of Illinois just one week after J6. On the evening of J6, Lyons shared a photo of the picture frame he took with his friends and said: "I'm pretty confident I am now a multiple Federal felon." It is very unlikely that the item he is holding is a badge and if it is, it is probably one that doesn't belong to him. Source assist: Brick Suit

Collin Rugg

3,261,819 просмотров • 2 лет назад

Actor and Model Harshil Kalia died on Monday after her car lost control and crashed into a divider in Jaipur. The accident occurred on Jaipur's Shipra Path Road. Kalia was returning home from work around 11:30 pm when her vehicle crashed into a divider, causing the car to overturn. CCTV footage shows the vehicle crashing into the divider and flipping on its left side. Local residents righted the vehicle and rescued Kalia. The 30-year-old was then rushed to a private hospital. She had sustained severe head injuries, and doctors at the hospital pronounced her dead. Police said they are working to determine the exact cause of the accident, specifically whether the vehicle was speeding or if another vehicle attempted to overtake it. The police have conducted a post-mortem examination and have handed over the body to the family members. Kalia had worked in the web series 'Crime Next Door', served as an anchor for a news channel, and played the lead female role in several Rajasthani songs. Recently, she was actively pursuing a career in modelling. Kalia's father is also associated with the field of journalism and works for a private newspaper.
0:17

Actor and Model Harshil Kalia died on Monday after her car lost control and crashed into a divider in Jaipur. The accident occurred on Jaipur's Shipra Path Road. Kalia was returning home from work around 11:30 pm when her vehicle crashed into a divider, causing the car to overturn. CCTV footage shows the vehicle crashing into the divider and flipping on its left side. Local residents righted the vehicle and rescued Kalia. The 30-year-old was then rushed to a private hospital. She had sustained severe head injuries, and doctors at the hospital pronounced her dead. Police said they are working to determine the exact cause of the accident, specifically whether the vehicle was speeding or if another vehicle attempted to overtake it. The police have conducted a post-mortem examination and have handed over the body to the family members. Kalia had worked in the web series 'Crime Next Door', served as an anchor for a news channel, and played the lead female role in several Rajasthani songs. Recently, she was actively pursuing a career in modelling. Kalia's father is also associated with the field of journalism and works for a private newspaper.

Hate Detector 🔍

56,724 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

🚨BREAKING: New video footage has been released showing the moments leading up to the deadly ICE shooting in Biddeford, Maine. In the video, ICE agents appear to be running alongside the vehicle, pulling on the doors as the driver tries to leave. The person is not “weaponizing” their vehicle, or trying to run agents over. They appear to be trying to drive away from masked, armed men attempting to force their way into the car. This is exactly what we’ve seen in video after video across the country… ICE agents surrounding vehicles, pulling people over before identifying them, trying to force their way inside, and demanding proof of citizenship. Which is a violation of the Fourth Amendment. The Constitution exists to prevent exactly this kind of government intrusion. And when the government lets agents ignore those limits without accountability, they’re not just violating people’s rights… they’re creating the exact conditions that turn routine encounters into deadly ones. If the government keeps treating the Fourth Amendment like it’s optional, more people are going to panic. And more people are going to get shot.
0:15

🚨BREAKING: New video footage has been released showing the moments leading up to the deadly ICE shooting in Biddeford, Maine. In the video, ICE agents appear to be running alongside the vehicle, pulling on the doors as the driver tries to leave. The person is not “weaponizing” their vehicle, or trying to run agents over. They appear to be trying to drive away from masked, armed men attempting to force their way into the car. This is exactly what we’ve seen in video after video across the country… ICE agents surrounding vehicles, pulling people over before identifying them, trying to force their way inside, and demanding proof of citizenship. Which is a violation of the Fourth Amendment. The Constitution exists to prevent exactly this kind of government intrusion. And when the government lets agents ignore those limits without accountability, they’re not just violating people’s rights… they’re creating the exact conditions that turn routine encounters into deadly ones. If the government keeps treating the Fourth Amendment like it’s optional, more people are going to panic. And more people are going to get shot.

Jesus Freakin Congress

69,387 просмотров • 10 дней назад

I LOVE this! THIS is what Caitlin Clark was doing in college. She elbowed players. She shoved players. She knocked players down. She taunted players. She provoked players. She humiliated players. Her opponents never responded in college…..until Angel Reese did. THEN Caitlin became a victim. Poor innocent little white girl being taunted by big mean black girl. ———————————————— After that, she went into the WNBA, and started trying the same arrogant tactics, and they knocked the CRAP out of her. You can be a Bully, or you can be a VICTIM, but you can’t be BOTH. In this case, she hit a big shot, and jumped in her opponents face yelling, “YOU LIKE THAT??!” THIS is why opponents were fouling Caitlin so hard during her rookie year. THIS is why it appeared at times that opponents were trying to injure Caitlin. ———————————————— It was not jealousy. It was not her endorsements. It was not because she was white. It was not because she was straight. Nope. It was not ANY of that. She provoked her opponents. They gave her what she was asking for…….and she started crying, and her body fell apart. They are going to start hammering her again, but this time, I don’t want any victim tweets. If you dish it out, in ANY sport, you have to be ready for what comes WITH that! This is no different than a baseball player hitting a homerun, and standing at the plate posing as the ball sails over the wall. Then getting hit in the head with a 102 mph fastball in his next at bat.
0:14

I LOVE this! THIS is what Caitlin Clark was doing in college. She elbowed players. She shoved players. She knocked players down. She taunted players. She provoked players. She humiliated players. Her opponents never responded in college…..until Angel Reese did. THEN Caitlin became a victim. Poor innocent little white girl being taunted by big mean black girl. ———————————————— After that, she went into the WNBA, and started trying the same arrogant tactics, and they knocked the CRAP out of her. You can be a Bully, or you can be a VICTIM, but you can’t be BOTH. In this case, she hit a big shot, and jumped in her opponents face yelling, “YOU LIKE THAT??!” THIS is why opponents were fouling Caitlin so hard during her rookie year. THIS is why it appeared at times that opponents were trying to injure Caitlin. ———————————————— It was not jealousy. It was not her endorsements. It was not because she was white. It was not because she was straight. Nope. It was not ANY of that. She provoked her opponents. They gave her what she was asking for…….and she started crying, and her body fell apart. They are going to start hammering her again, but this time, I don’t want any victim tweets. If you dish it out, in ANY sport, you have to be ready for what comes WITH that! This is no different than a baseball player hitting a homerun, and standing at the plate posing as the ball sails over the wall. Then getting hit in the head with a 102 mph fastball in his next at bat.

Hovah76

93,508 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

No. You don’t get to launder this by calling him an “observer,” as if he were a neutral bystander who happened to be shot for no reason. Everyone knows what’s happening. Literal communists are operating in lockstep with taxpayer-funded NGOs to mass-recruit people, whip them into a frenzy, and deploy them in defense of their own interests. The recruiting pipeline is obvious and consistent: the disabled, the mentally ill, the elderly. We’ve all seen the footage. Organizations like States at the Core then train these people to obstruct ICE. They drill escalation, not restraint. Doxxing. Harassment. Following agents. Surrounding vehicles. Screaming. Conditioning people to intervene at any cost. And it works. Watch the video I attached. A small woman steps alone in front of a moving car. The physics don’t matter to her. Self-preservation doesn’t matter. Her survival instinct has been stripped out and replaced with obedience. That doesn’t happen organically. You know it. I know it. Everyone knows it. And not one of you has said, “Maybe don’t do this. Maybe don’t send people to play chicken with vehicles and guns.” You didn’t speak up because dead bodies are useful to you. They justify the next riot. Once you condition people this way, it’s inevitable that someone shows up armed. It’s inevitable that ICE agents are threatened. It’s inevitable that you misframe it afterward. It’s inevitable that you roll out barricades and prepare for a night of fire in Minneapolis. And yes, it’s inevitable that you push people into this in subzero weather like lab animals—MK-Ultra levels of behavioral control. You are despicable because this is all about money. About keeping the grift alive. You’re willing to put people in harm’s way, to break them, even to kill them, so your funding and your lifestyle continue uninterrupted. The so-called “observer” was a victim, but not of ICE. He was a victim of you.
0:18

No. You don’t get to launder this by calling him an “observer,” as if he were a neutral bystander who happened to be shot for no reason. Everyone knows what’s happening. Literal communists are operating in lockstep with taxpayer-funded NGOs to mass-recruit people, whip them into a frenzy, and deploy them in defense of their own interests. The recruiting pipeline is obvious and consistent: the disabled, the mentally ill, the elderly. We’ve all seen the footage. Organizations like States at the Core then train these people to obstruct ICE. They drill escalation, not restraint. Doxxing. Harassment. Following agents. Surrounding vehicles. Screaming. Conditioning people to intervene at any cost. And it works. Watch the video I attached. A small woman steps alone in front of a moving car. The physics don’t matter to her. Self-preservation doesn’t matter. Her survival instinct has been stripped out and replaced with obedience. That doesn’t happen organically. You know it. I know it. Everyone knows it. And not one of you has said, “Maybe don’t do this. Maybe don’t send people to play chicken with vehicles and guns.” You didn’t speak up because dead bodies are useful to you. They justify the next riot. Once you condition people this way, it’s inevitable that someone shows up armed. It’s inevitable that ICE agents are threatened. It’s inevitable that you misframe it afterward. It’s inevitable that you roll out barricades and prepare for a night of fire in Minneapolis. And yes, it’s inevitable that you push people into this in subzero weather like lab animals—MK-Ultra levels of behavioral control. You are despicable because this is all about money. About keeping the grift alive. You’re willing to put people in harm’s way, to break them, even to kill them, so your funding and your lifestyle continue uninterrupted. The so-called “observer” was a victim, but not of ICE. He was a victim of you.

DataRepublican (small r)

425,833 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад

🚨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 forward. Instead of continuing to drive down the road, the ICE agent is blocking a pickup truck from turning, while pointing a gun, out their window, directly at the driver of that truck. The truck backs up, but the agent still keeps the firearm pointed at the driver. Only AFTER people begin honking their horns does the agent lower their weapon, and drive away. The law states that pointing a firearm at someone is considered a serious threat of deadly force. It is only justified when an officer has an objectively reasonable belief that they are facing an immediate threat of death, or serious bodily harm. It is not legally allowed to be used to control traffic, and it is not legally allowed to be used as intimidation. And that’s exactly why this video should be alarming to you. The agent is not boxed in… nothing is preventing them from driving down the street. Meanwhile, the agent is the one preventing the truck from continuing its turn. And they are doing so while pointing a gun at the driver. So, the question becomes… What immediate threat justified the ICE agent to stop their car, and point a firearm at a U.S. citizen? Because we are seeing a growing pattern, of publicly documented incidents, where ICE agents point firearms at legal observers, journalists, and bystanders during enforcement encounters… when they are not facing an immediate threat of death. That is not how public safety works. Pointing a firearm at someone is one of the most serious things an officer can do, because it instantly escalates an encounter into a potential deadly force situation. And that is exactly why the law is supposed to restrict it. Every unnecessary drawn gun increases the risk of a wrong judgment, and a fatal mistake. And when there is no accountability, for when that line gets crossed, drawing a gun because the normal for every situation. And when it becomes normal, more people’s lives are put in danger.
0:13

🚨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 forward. Instead of continuing to drive down the road, the ICE agent is blocking a pickup truck from turning, while pointing a gun, out their window, directly at the driver of that truck. The truck backs up, but the agent still keeps the firearm pointed at the driver. Only AFTER people begin honking their horns does the agent lower their weapon, and drive away. The law states that pointing a firearm at someone is considered a serious threat of deadly force. It is only justified when an officer has an objectively reasonable belief that they are facing an immediate threat of death, or serious bodily harm. It is not legally allowed to be used to control traffic, and it is not legally allowed to be used as intimidation. And that’s exactly why this video should be alarming to you. The agent is not boxed in… nothing is preventing them from driving down the street. Meanwhile, the agent is the one preventing the truck from continuing its turn. And they are doing so while pointing a gun at the driver. So, the question becomes… What immediate threat justified the ICE agent to stop their car, and point a firearm at a U.S. citizen? Because we are seeing a growing pattern, of publicly documented incidents, where ICE agents point firearms at legal observers, journalists, and bystanders during enforcement encounters… when they are not facing an immediate threat of death. That is not how public safety works. Pointing a firearm at someone is one of the most serious things an officer can do, because it instantly escalates an encounter into a potential deadly force situation. And that is exactly why the law is supposed to restrict it. Every unnecessary drawn gun increases the risk of a wrong judgment, and a fatal mistake. And when there is no accountability, for when that line gets crossed, drawing a gun because the normal for every situation. And when it becomes normal, more people’s lives are put in danger.

Jesus Freakin Congress

231,345 просмотров • 27 дней назад

These are clips culled from the videos we all watched. You people and the man have lied that the girl said, "Who does this man think he is?" Meanwhile, the video evidence in the first frame shows that all she said was,"Can you imagine? What is this?" Video evidence in the second frame shows that the man was holding onto the neck of her dress and pulling it towards himself; a dress with a low neckline, which means that by pulling it away from her, he exposed her breasts to full public view. Anyone with a height higher than that neckline would have a clear view of that girl's breasts. That same video evidence shows that all the girl did initially was try to get his hands off her dress, and only swung at him and pulled his own clothing when he refused to let go. Twist this issue all you like. It does not change the facts on video. You people expected the girl to cower and accept to be treated like an animal just because the man is an elder and a lecturer.
0:12

These are clips culled from the videos we all watched. You people and the man have lied that the girl said, "Who does this man think he is?" Meanwhile, the video evidence in the first frame shows that all she said was,"Can you imagine? What is this?" Video evidence in the second frame shows that the man was holding onto the neck of her dress and pulling it towards himself; a dress with a low neckline, which means that by pulling it away from her, he exposed her breasts to full public view. Anyone with a height higher than that neckline would have a clear view of that girl's breasts. That same video evidence shows that all the girl did initially was try to get his hands off her dress, and only swung at him and pulled his own clothing when he refused to let go. Twist this issue all you like. It does not change the facts on video. You people expected the girl to cower and accept to be treated like an animal just because the man is an elder and a lecturer.

KWEKU THE HUSTLER NWA PETER OBI

31,653 просмотров • 1 год назад

🚨🚨BREAKING NEWS 🚨 🇹🇷 Footage Shows Armed Robbery Attempt Thwarted by Rocket Launcher in Turkey A group of armed motorcyclists attempting to rob a vehicle on a road in Turkey quickly fled when the driver retrieved a rocket launcher from the trunk and pointed it toward them, according to widely shared video footage. The clip shows the attackers approaching the stopped car with rifles before one occupant responds by pulling out the heavy anti-tank weapon. The would-be robbers retreated without shots fired, and the incident has drawn massive online attention as one of the year’s most unusual events. While the video highlights a dramatic reversal, it also reflects broader challenges with armed crime and the proliferation of powerful weapons in certain regions, where individuals increasingly resort to extreme measures for self-defense amid concerns over public safety and law enforcement effectiveness. Such cases underscore ongoing debates about security, personal protection, and the risks of heavily armed societies. What does this incident reveal about everyday security in high-risk areas?
0:11

🚨🚨BREAKING NEWS 🚨 🇹🇷 Footage Shows Armed Robbery Attempt Thwarted by Rocket Launcher in Turkey A group of armed motorcyclists attempting to rob a vehicle on a road in Turkey quickly fled when the driver retrieved a rocket launcher from the trunk and pointed it toward them, according to widely shared video footage. The clip shows the attackers approaching the stopped car with rifles before one occupant responds by pulling out the heavy anti-tank weapon. The would-be robbers retreated without shots fired, and the incident has drawn massive online attention as one of the year’s most unusual events. While the video highlights a dramatic reversal, it also reflects broader challenges with armed crime and the proliferation of powerful weapons in certain regions, where individuals increasingly resort to extreme measures for self-defense amid concerns over public safety and law enforcement effectiveness. Such cases underscore ongoing debates about security, personal protection, and the risks of heavily armed societies. What does this incident reveal about everyday security in high-risk areas?

Corefrontline

720,415 просмотров • 7 дней назад

🚨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

716,308 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

🚨FROM SIDEKICK TO SUCCESSOR IN 6 WEEKS: Was Mikey McCoy Groomed to Replace Charlie Kirk? 🤔Footage Shows McCoy Flee the Scene —Was It All Planned? A Disturbing Timeline: According to a reliable source, Little Mikey McCoy was being positioned to succeed Charlie Kirk in the weeks leading up to the tragic UVU shooting. On September 10, eyewitness footage captures McCoy abruptly leaving the scene as Kirk lay wounded and unattended, prioritizing an immediate call to Erika Kirk at 11:53 a.m.—while she sat in her mother's Phoenix hospital room. As detailed in the New York Times, Erika later reflected that she sensed the gravity before McCoy uttered the words: "He's been shot." Just six weeks later, on October 24, McCoy assumes Kirk's prominent role at Liberty University's convocation, headlining the TPUSA tour in what appears to be a seamless transition. The sequence of events aligns with uncanny precision. Coincidence, or orchestration? The implications are profoundly unsettling. What are your thoughts?
0:13

🚨FROM SIDEKICK TO SUCCESSOR IN 6 WEEKS: Was Mikey McCoy Groomed to Replace Charlie Kirk? 🤔Footage Shows McCoy Flee the Scene —Was It All Planned? A Disturbing Timeline: According to a reliable source, Little Mikey McCoy was being positioned to succeed Charlie Kirk in the weeks leading up to the tragic UVU shooting. On September 10, eyewitness footage captures McCoy abruptly leaving the scene as Kirk lay wounded and unattended, prioritizing an immediate call to Erika Kirk at 11:53 a.m.—while she sat in her mother's Phoenix hospital room. As detailed in the New York Times, Erika later reflected that she sensed the gravity before McCoy uttered the words: "He's been shot." Just six weeks later, on October 24, McCoy assumes Kirk's prominent role at Liberty University's convocation, headlining the TPUSA tour in what appears to be a seamless transition. The sequence of events aligns with uncanny precision. Coincidence, or orchestration? The implications are profoundly unsettling. What are your thoughts?

Project Constitution

1,636,663 просмотров • 9 месяцев назад

Exactly. While this is true, it’s also irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. Ross was at fault, period. Here’s why: First off, it’s against DHS policy & training for an officer to approach a vehicle from the front in this situation, and this “officer-induced jeopardy” negates the officers use of force claim and puts him at fault, period. There’s no debate on this as video evidence from multiple sources clearly show Ross stopping in front of her vehicle, and then taking the time to shift his phone from his right hand to his left so he can draw his weapon…BEFORE she even started moving. THIS is simply reality, and the conversation should end here. Second, it’s against DHS Use of Deadly Force policy (which is codified law) to fire at a moving vehicle that doesn’t pose imminent danger to officers, and even if they ARE in danger, it mandates deescalation before using deadly force, which EXPRESSLY states simply “moving out of the way” of a vehicle as a correct course of action before using deadly force (see attached doc below). Third, there is already well-established legal precedent governing these EXACT types of situations, and this officer would likely be found guilty by any jury in the U.S. For example: Adam’s vs. Speers (2020): “Once Speers was no longer in the path of the vehicle, the justification for the use of deadly force ended.” Orn vs. City of Tacoma (2019): “A reasonable jury could conclude that once Orn was no longer in the car’s trajectory, the threat of serious physical harm to him was eliminated.” Cordova vs Aragon (2009): “Where the officer had moved out of the way of the oncoming vehicle, the use of deadly force was not justified.” Villanueva vs. Cali (2021): “a reasonable jury could conclude that the Officers used excessive force, because they lacked an objectively reasonable basis to fear for their own safety, as they could simply have stepped back or to the side to avoid being injured.” Fifth, the videos/pics below CLEARLY show the officer was NOT in immediate danger, and the woman was moving away from him when he fired his FIRST shot when he was already clear to the left of the vehicle, and he fired the second & third shots point-blank into her face from the SIDE of the vehicle as she passed. That alone is enough to send him to prison, even if his first shot was somehow inexplicably deemed to be justified.
0:28

Exactly. While this is true, it’s also irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. Ross was at fault, period. Here’s why: First off, it’s against DHS policy & training for an officer to approach a vehicle from the front in this situation, and this “officer-induced jeopardy” negates the officers use of force claim and puts him at fault, period. There’s no debate on this as video evidence from multiple sources clearly show Ross stopping in front of her vehicle, and then taking the time to shift his phone from his right hand to his left so he can draw his weapon…BEFORE she even started moving. THIS is simply reality, and the conversation should end here. Second, it’s against DHS Use of Deadly Force policy (which is codified law) to fire at a moving vehicle that doesn’t pose imminent danger to officers, and even if they ARE in danger, it mandates deescalation before using deadly force, which EXPRESSLY states simply “moving out of the way” of a vehicle as a correct course of action before using deadly force (see attached doc below). Third, there is already well-established legal precedent governing these EXACT types of situations, and this officer would likely be found guilty by any jury in the U.S. For example: Adam’s vs. Speers (2020): “Once Speers was no longer in the path of the vehicle, the justification for the use of deadly force ended.” Orn vs. City of Tacoma (2019): “A reasonable jury could conclude that once Orn was no longer in the car’s trajectory, the threat of serious physical harm to him was eliminated.” Cordova vs Aragon (2009): “Where the officer had moved out of the way of the oncoming vehicle, the use of deadly force was not justified.” Villanueva vs. Cali (2021): “a reasonable jury could conclude that the Officers used excessive force, because they lacked an objectively reasonable basis to fear for their own safety, as they could simply have stepped back or to the side to avoid being injured.” Fifth, the videos/pics below CLEARLY show the officer was NOT in immediate danger, and the woman was moving away from him when he fired his FIRST shot when he was already clear to the left of the vehicle, and he fired the second & third shots point-blank into her face from the SIDE of the vehicle as she passed. That alone is enough to send him to prison, even if his first shot was somehow inexplicably deemed to be justified.

Notorious PJB

18,329 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад

in the wise words of taylor swift, “a man is allowed to react, a woman can only overreact.” they cut the camera to her while she was still in shock & she took a sip of her drink. that is not even a reaction. this whole situation has blown out of proportion throughout the media. you’d think things would’ve gotten better for women in the past five years since she said this, but that’s not the case. this has made one thing abundantly clear, women are not allowed to react when they are blatantly disrespected. even if they don’t react, they’re still overreacting, since there is this perpetuating stereotype that women are “dramatic & emotional.” she’s just sitting there trying to enjoy her night that she was attending because of HER accomplishments & the records she broke with her movie about her life-changing, record-smashing tour. yet, she was only mentioned once, only ten minutes in, to be devalued to her relationship & to poke fun at the ways the media has been tormenting her for years. you can not tell me that is funny. she’s been through hell throughout her career, she’s heard these jokes a million times—she’s over it. she shouldn’t have to laugh at a joke that offended her to appease anyone. personally, i’m extremely proud of her for not feeling it was necessary to be a people pleaser & laugh, which is what she typically would’ve done int the past. that shows growth, that shows that she finally recognizes her worth. she finally realized that she doesn’t have to put up being painfully disrespected. she’s allowed to think a rude joke isn’t funny, it just made her uncomfortable. if she looks uncomfortable, it means he crossed the line, regardless of if you think it was funny or not. it’s evident that this was an under reaction. she kept her composure & responded to the situation perfectly. however, even though she responded perfectly, she’s still getting tremendous amounts of hate for this. this makes it abundantly clear that men in this society will always have it out for women who are successful—especially when that success was created all on their own, since women are not allowed to be successful in their eyes. that is blatant misogyny, just like the joke they think she is a horrible person for not laughing at. of course they think the joke was funny, they’re a bunch of misogynists themselves.
0:14

in the wise words of taylor swift, “a man is allowed to react, a woman can only overreact.” they cut the camera to her while she was still in shock & she took a sip of her drink. that is not even a reaction. this whole situation has blown out of proportion throughout the media. you’d think things would’ve gotten better for women in the past five years since she said this, but that’s not the case. this has made one thing abundantly clear, women are not allowed to react when they are blatantly disrespected. even if they don’t react, they’re still overreacting, since there is this perpetuating stereotype that women are “dramatic & emotional.” she’s just sitting there trying to enjoy her night that she was attending because of HER accomplishments & the records she broke with her movie about her life-changing, record-smashing tour. yet, she was only mentioned once, only ten minutes in, to be devalued to her relationship & to poke fun at the ways the media has been tormenting her for years. you can not tell me that is funny. she’s been through hell throughout her career, she’s heard these jokes a million times—she’s over it. she shouldn’t have to laugh at a joke that offended her to appease anyone. personally, i’m extremely proud of her for not feeling it was necessary to be a people pleaser & laugh, which is what she typically would’ve done int the past. that shows growth, that shows that she finally recognizes her worth. she finally realized that she doesn’t have to put up being painfully disrespected. she’s allowed to think a rude joke isn’t funny, it just made her uncomfortable. if she looks uncomfortable, it means he crossed the line, regardless of if you think it was funny or not. it’s evident that this was an under reaction. she kept her composure & responded to the situation perfectly. however, even though she responded perfectly, she’s still getting tremendous amounts of hate for this. this makes it abundantly clear that men in this society will always have it out for women who are successful—especially when that success was created all on their own, since women are not allowed to be successful in their eyes. that is blatant misogyny, just like the joke they think she is a horrible person for not laughing at. of course they think the joke was funny, they’re a bunch of misogynists themselves.

kira ♡🐞 NOAH WEEK!!

657,462 просмотров • 2 лет назад

Just a reminder: while in office, Mendel physically confronted and harassed journalists (video attached). She did not hold the position for long, but during that time she was involved in multiple cringe-worthy scandals and controversial statements. Some of my colleagues in D.C. have been texting me for a while asking what happened to her. The answer is simple: nothing happened to her — she was always like this. Inside Ukraine, she was never taken very seriously. Somehow, though, she managed to build credibility abroad, especially in the U.S., and gained a large following on Twitter. Zelenskyy’s team was very different when he first took office compared to what it is today. But even back then, they quickly realized hiring her was a mistake, and she was let go. The only real difference now may be that she is acting openly as a Russian asset. Or perhaps she is simply trying to use this scandal to gain legal status in the U.S. as someone claiming political persecution.
0:19

Just a reminder: while in office, Mendel physically confronted and harassed journalists (video attached). She did not hold the position for long, but during that time she was involved in multiple cringe-worthy scandals and controversial statements. Some of my colleagues in D.C. have been texting me for a while asking what happened to her. The answer is simple: nothing happened to her — she was always like this. Inside Ukraine, she was never taken very seriously. Somehow, though, she managed to build credibility abroad, especially in the U.S., and gained a large following on Twitter. Zelenskyy’s team was very different when he first took office compared to what it is today. But even back then, they quickly realized hiring her was a mistake, and she was let go. The only real difference now may be that she is acting openly as a Russian asset. Or perhaps she is simply trying to use this scandal to gain legal status in the U.S. as someone claiming political persecution.

Kateryna Lisunova

34,218 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

Shout to all the LeBron fanboys that think "The Silencer" is a LeBron original. It's not. He stole it from Nick Van Exel, and in the past, admitted that it was The Quick's celebration. Below is Nick doing "The Silencer" in the damn 90s and LeBron, after doing it, saying "I'm on my Nick Van Exel right now" You mfs can claim this dude is an original all you want, but if you do it around me, I'ma cook you every time. There's nothing original about LeBron - everything is borrowed and/or stolen, and where other legends show aura, he just shows the cringe of someone TRYING to be that dude. F..ck you very much
0:13

Shout to all the LeBron fanboys that think "The Silencer" is a LeBron original. It's not. He stole it from Nick Van Exel, and in the past, admitted that it was The Quick's celebration. Below is Nick doing "The Silencer" in the damn 90s and LeBron, after doing it, saying "I'm on my Nick Van Exel right now" You mfs can claim this dude is an original all you want, but if you do it around me, I'ma cook you every time. There's nothing original about LeBron - everything is borrowed and/or stolen, and where other legends show aura, he just shows the cringe of someone TRYING to be that dude. F..ck you very much

Apex Jones

111,187 просмотров • 7 месяцев назад

🚨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

995,046 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад