Fascists taking over your country angers patriots.
POLITICAL THREAD
- Thread starter kybobcat_rivals185207
- Start date
You could have called PI on both of those guys, offensive player is putting hands to the face and their fighting each other for position.
It was a terrible play to roll out and go toward the corner where it was congested with two receivers. They should have ran deep crossing routes in the endzone.
I know this had to have been shared. This is why it's so important that the right gets fixed because the left is iredeemible with this mindset.
That's what you want to hear from your head coach 
Dumbassery knows no bounds
I hope he/she/it enjoys anal rape... most liberals do
Shiiiiiiiiiet, I won’t comment more on that.
needs to resign before his personal is in ruins. Not built for this
There’s another picture of her on tbe FOX website that I absolutely recognized from the George Floyd era.
That’s a lot of words to say you, in fact, did not call for him to be criminally prosecuted. You called for him to be “morally” prosecuted. Lol.
The actual number of leftists is far less than their ghost ballots make them appear. On the streets they are just enough to serve as unarmed targets, so, it’s not in their interest to push for widespread violence.
The people voted for deportation.
Grok
@grok
·
2h
No, that's not Renee Nicole Good. The photos show activist Lia McGeever screaming at a 2023 San Francisco Board of Supervisors meeting in protest over a trans man's death. Confirmed via multiple sources; it's a common misidentification in recent discussions.
Teellen
@bellgirl67
·
1h
Grok is mistaken - this woman is Deana Sherif
So its for love of country? Like love of the founding principles? Or borders? Or western tradition?
That's what you want to hear from your head coach
The internet Pope haters are working overtime to try and run him off. Sad stuff. Not you, but others that are distorting what he said.
Jack Pilgrim
@JackPilgrimKSR
Full quote: "There's no time for indulging and feeling -- I spent a lot of time feeling like I'd like to curl up a bit and kill myself, but that's actually not what we do. We raise up and we get to work and we find answers, and that's actually where the great part of life comes from, is answering the bell."
Sam said that ICE was like Gestapo because they lacked transparency. 48 hours later, they release the entire video for the world to see for themselves.
Sam, you’ve been owned again.
Sam, you’ve been owned again.
It's working just fine. You will ALWAYS have a select few who buck the system, but for the most part it holds pretty close (or as close as possible) to the party platform as designed. There isn't and will never be, a 100% rock solid pure conservative party. Even now, you have MAGA that tilts a bit more right than normal. That isn't a bad thing, but it will correct itself when Vance or DeSantis takes office.
You're truly out there these days w/ pipe dreams and pink unicorns.
LEO vs. member of the public. Different standards, burdens, and responsibilities.
The fact that you believe this speaks volumes about your lack of anything resembling integrity or common sense.
The problem is that there is so much of this mental illness across the country. I don't have the answer but something has to be done about it.
Are you a nutbar? I very clearly say there he should be prosecuted, even if it doesn't secure a conviction. Just take the L and learn something about the political spectrum. Of all the things to double down on...
Yes. The first. The second is just the legalism people use to justify the bigotry they propagandize with the third.
"Treasury is providing training to Minnesota law enforcement on how to utilize financial data such as suspicious activity reports to better combat these fraud schemes."
"Treasury will deploy all tools to bring an end to this egregious, unchecked fraud and hold perpetrators to account."
This is ON TOP of Treasury and IRS investigations.
Oh it’s the same person. It may not be the SAME person but like Tweak and Sam it’s the same person. lolGrok
@grok
·
2h
No, that's not Renee Nicole Good. The photos show activist Lia McGeever screaming at a 2023 San Francisco Board of Supervisors meeting in protest over a trans man's death. Confirmed via multiple sources; it's a common misidentification in recent discussions.
Teellen
@bellgirl67
·
1h
Grok is mistaken - this woman is Deana Sherif
I simply can't imagine being so feeble minded that you never question communist indoctrination that convinces you to hate yourself, hate your country, hate your culture, hate your children, hate your race, hate rule of law. Being so feeble.minded that you actually believe that the cult of hate is somehow "moral." Truly " useful idiots."
99% of the city officials in Minneapolis that come to the mic to speak are poster children for DEI. The straight family w/ a white picket fence home w/ 2 kids/dog need not apply.
This video proves to me that the ICE agent had reasonable fear of being in danger, and rightfully used lethal means to protect himself and others:
I saw this explanation that was pretty solid regarding Babbit vs Good:
Ashley was in the wrong for sure but her case does not merit lethal force while the other does.
The ICE shooting case:
Intent and context:
She was not a bystander. She and her partner deliberately positioned themselves (their vehicle) to obstruct a lawful federal operation and film it. That matters. Courts care about intent and context, not Instagram captions.
Lawful orders:
She was given a lawful command to exit the vehicle. Refusal escalates the encounter from protest to enforcement.
Active flight:
Attempting to flee a lawful detention is itself a crime. That’s a bright-line rule.
Use of vehicle as force:
Striking an officer with a vehicle, even unintentionally during flight, legally transforms the situation. At that point, the vehicle is treated as a deadly weapon under use-of-force standards.
Bottom line:
This becomes a rapidly escalating enforcement scenario where deadly force can be legally justified under federal use-of-force doctrine if an officer reasonably perceives an imminent threat to life.
That doesn’t mean it’s good. It means it’s legally defensible.
Ashley Babbitt:
Location and posture:
She was inside the U.S. Capitol during a breach. That is serious, but context still matters.
Weapon status:
She was unarmed. No firearm. No knife. No vehicle. No improvised weapon.
Distance and barriers:
She was climbing through a broken window into a barricaded area, but multiple armed officers were behind her, with cover, distance, and numerical advantage.
Threat immediacy:
She was not actively attacking an officer. She was not striking anyone. She was not using force capable of causing immediate death or serious bodily harm in that moment.
Alternatives available:
Less-lethal options, physical restraint, or continued containment were all plausibly available given positioning and backup.
Bottom line:
Her actions were criminal and reckless, but the immediacy threshold for deadly force is far more debatable here than in a vehicular assault scenario.
The key legal distinction people keep ignoring: Deadly force hinges on imminent threat, not moral approval.
A fleeing vehicle that strikes or threatens officers
→ commonly meets the imminent threat standard.
An unarmed individual climbing through a window with armed officers in control of the space
→ does not automatically meet that standard.
That’s the crux. Not politics. Not race. Not slogans
Ashley was in the wrong for sure but her case does not merit lethal force while the other does.
The ICE shooting case:
Intent and context:
She was not a bystander. She and her partner deliberately positioned themselves (their vehicle) to obstruct a lawful federal operation and film it. That matters. Courts care about intent and context, not Instagram captions.
Lawful orders:
She was given a lawful command to exit the vehicle. Refusal escalates the encounter from protest to enforcement.
Active flight:
Attempting to flee a lawful detention is itself a crime. That’s a bright-line rule.
Use of vehicle as force:
Striking an officer with a vehicle, even unintentionally during flight, legally transforms the situation. At that point, the vehicle is treated as a deadly weapon under use-of-force standards.
Bottom line:
This becomes a rapidly escalating enforcement scenario where deadly force can be legally justified under federal use-of-force doctrine if an officer reasonably perceives an imminent threat to life.
That doesn’t mean it’s good. It means it’s legally defensible.
Ashley Babbitt:
Location and posture:
She was inside the U.S. Capitol during a breach. That is serious, but context still matters.
Weapon status:
She was unarmed. No firearm. No knife. No vehicle. No improvised weapon.
Distance and barriers:
She was climbing through a broken window into a barricaded area, but multiple armed officers were behind her, with cover, distance, and numerical advantage.
Threat immediacy:
She was not actively attacking an officer. She was not striking anyone. She was not using force capable of causing immediate death or serious bodily harm in that moment.
Alternatives available:
Less-lethal options, physical restraint, or continued containment were all plausibly available given positioning and backup.
Bottom line:
Her actions were criminal and reckless, but the immediacy threshold for deadly force is far more debatable here than in a vehicular assault scenario.
The key legal distinction people keep ignoring: Deadly force hinges on imminent threat, not moral approval.
A fleeing vehicle that strikes or threatens officers
→ commonly meets the imminent threat standard.
An unarmed individual climbing through a window with armed officers in control of the space
→ does not automatically meet that standard.
That’s the crux. Not politics. Not race. Not slogans
I can't tell who the butch of the relationship was but her movie producer sure egged in on.
Imagine her children confronting these lunatic eyes someday and knowing that she cared more about Somalians and Mexicans than them.