11 hours ago, newnative said:

The judge who handled the case had this to say:

As the court explained in its recent decision denying Mr Trump’s motion for a new trial on damages and other relief [in the New York case] … based on all of the evidence at trial and the jury’s verdict as a whole, the jury’s finding that Mr Trump ‘sexually abused’ Ms Carroll implicitly determined that he forcibly penetrated her digitally – in other words, that Mr Trump in fact did ‘rape’ Ms Carroll as that term commonly is used and understood in contexts outside of the New York penal law.”

Under NY law he was convicted on the lesser charge of sexual abuse due to the type of rape involved. As I said in my earlier post, what a state we are in even debating this issue in the context of a president of the US. We have been in the Twilight Zone for sometime now, and it seems to be getting darker every day.

There was a civil case with zero evidence presented.

11 hours ago, newnative said:

She was not interfering in any federal activities. The agents were in their car, driving somewhere. Maybe on a donut run. In any case, they should have continued to drive and let the local traffic police handle the possible traffic violation.

Yes, she was.

14 minutes ago, Effective altruism said:

Tennessee V. Garner

471 US 1 (1985)

Grahams V. Connor

490 US 386 (1989)

To note however these are both civil cases and not directly related to any potential criminal indictment.

13 hours ago, blaze master said:

Frightened? What a misleading comment.

She was so Frightened that she sat in her car honking her horn over and over bobbing up and down in glee before the shooting. Then she speaks to the officer in a condescending voice when confronted. Showing how scared she was.

Ya she was so scared.

Keeping in mind she initiated the confrontation.

She was part of the growing cadre of progressive white women who believe they are morally superior and can obstruct federal law enforcement without facing any consequences. Did you see the news about the judge who helped an illegal alien escape arrest from ICE?

1 minute ago, Effective altruism said:

She was part of the growing cadre of progressive white women who believe they are morally superior and can obstruct federal law enforcement without facing any consequences. Did you see the news about the judge who helped an illegal alien escape arrest from ICE?

Ya she got fired no ?

5 minutes ago, JerryM said:

To note however these are both civil cases and not directly related to any potential criminal indictment.

These case define how the cops are judged.

Just now, blaze master said:

Ya she got fired no ?

She is now in jail.

34 minutes ago, blaze master said:

Just the words of a sincere soccer mom right.

Very relevant. She was there to provocate.

No one knows what threat the officer felt. Only he was in that situation.

I personally think the road conditions that caused the tires to spin and engine to rev from her pressing the accelerator caused him to panic. This is due to his history and ptsd. As I have also stated I dont believe he should of been at work in the field. This is a massive failure of the entire system.

Now please if you may. Point out my comments supporting Trump. Ill wait but youll go quiet or give the same npc response as the others. I could even pre type it.

Try some critical thinking and less clouded judgements due to your own political bias and ideology.

It’s something of an encouragement that you’ve moved from outright support for the Agent shooting a mother in face three times to trying to come up with excuses for his behavior.

However, if as you argue, the killer’s alleged PTSD is an issue in his actions, then this, rather than absolving him, indicates he was on duty while in a dangerous state of mind.

That’s no excuse for his actions but does raise important questions on the culpability of ICE itself and his supervisors in particular.

ICE arming mentally fragile agents and putting them in U.S. streets is not a good look. Made worse when they start shooting mothers in the face three times.

That asside, these details being released by the administration in their attempts to ‘manage perceptions’ are perhaps another example of the administration providing prosecutors with information on the killer that would ordinarily be controlled and released by his criminal defense team.

I doubt the FBI and DOJ will act in any of this, Minesotta definitely will.

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

doubt the FBI and DOJ will act in any of this, Minesotta definitely will.

Minnesota has no jurisdiction in this case. But, this won’t stop them from trying. The left thrives on the political theater.

An officer's life does not have to be in danger to fire their weapon, the officer only has to believe his life is in danger.

If someone pulls a toy gun out and an officer shoots them, the shooting is justified.

Of course, if it's a little kid in a cowboy costume on Halloween, the shooting would not be justified. The officer's belief has to be reasonable, under the circumstances.

Inflammatory posts with personal attacks toward other members have been removed:

• Be polite and respectful to other users.

• Avoid flaming, trolling, or stalking other members.

10 minutes ago, Effective altruism said:

She was part of the growing cadre of progressive white women who believe they are morally superior and can obstruct federal law enforcement without facing any consequences. Did you see the news about the judge who helped an illegal alien escape arrest from ICE?

They have morals, whereas others clearly don't.

5 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

It’s something of an encouragement that you’ve moved from outright support for the Agent shooting a mother in face three times to trying to come up with excuses for his behavior.

However, if as you argue, the killer’s alleged PTSD is an issue in his actions, then this, rather than absolving him, indicates he was on duty while in a dangerous state of mind.

That’s no excuse for his actions but does raise important questions on the culpability of ICE itself and his supervisors in particular.

ICE arming mentally fragile agents and putting them in U.S. streets is not a good look. Made worse when they start shooting mothers in the face three times.

That asside, these details being released by the administration in their attempts to ‘manage perceptions’ are perhaps another example of the administration providing prosecutors with information on the killer that would ordinarily be controlled and released by his criminal defense team.

I doubt the FBI and DOJ will act in any of this, Minesotta definitely will.

You again..... making stuff up.

At no time have I supported the officer. You are flat out lying. Pathetic but standard from you.

I have simply stated facts about this from the beginning. Please do show me where I supported the actions of the officer.

Ill wait

But as usual youll deflect and gaslight.

4 minutes ago, stevenl said:

They have morals, whereas others clearly don't.

Per the left, people that break laws to protest laws they don't like, moral. People that enforce the law against lawbreakers, immoral.

You guys crack me up.

27 minutes ago, Effective altruism said:

These case define how the cops are judged.

Even if so -- reasonable officer vs. reasonable person -- it is all moot until DoJ decides to secure a grand jury indictment.

9 minutes ago, Effective altruism said:

You are nothing but a low level thinker. Which is why you are on the left. Take your Reductio ad Hitlerum to someone who cares.

With your answer "Reductio ad Hitlerum" you want to show your level of education. All right, if you need it.
However, my feeling is correct:
Persecution and physical destruction of Jews and political opponents by the SA, SS, Gestapo...
analogous to:
Persecution of immigrants and political opponents of the Orange by the judiciary, FBI, ICE...

And you are a part of this system!

23 hours ago, blaze master said:

The accelerator had been pressed. The man was rammed.

You obviously need glasses.............😂

21 hours ago, Yagoda said:

ICE have the power to make arrests for violations of Federal Law. This woman was violating Federal law.

🤣..............So funny..............🤣

The woman gets executed, and you bring up violating federal law............🤣

21 minutes ago, Effective altruism said:

Minnesota has no jurisdiction in this case. But, this won’t stop them from trying. The left thrives on the political theater.

Minesotta absolutely has jurisdiction.

Get used to that before the reality upsets you.

10 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Per the left, people that break laws to protest laws they don't like, moral. People that enforce the law against lawbreakers, immoral.

You guys crack me up.

Says a Trump voter................😆

21 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

An officer's life does not have to be in danger to fire their weapon, the officer only has to believe his life is in danger.

If someone pulls a toy gun out and an officer shoots them, the shooting is justified.

Of course, if it's a little kid in a cowboy costume on Halloween, the shooting would not be justified. The officer's belief has to be reasonable, under the circumstances.

Wrong, just shows you know sod all, do some research on the subject...............

16 minutes ago, blaze master said:

You again..... making stuff up.

At no time have I supported the officer. You are flat out lying. Pathetic but standard from you.

I have simply stated facts about this from the beginning. Please do show me where I supported the actions of the officer.

Ill wait

But as usual youll deflect and gaslight.

I didn’t say you supported the officer.

I said you supported his actions.

Not the same thing.

I’ll ignore your ‘lying’ taunt.

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

I didn’t say you supported tge officer.

I said you supported his actions.

Not the same thing.

Show me where I supported his actions. I have simply stated facts. You are lying.

7 minutes ago, transam said:

Says a Trump voter................😆

Yes, protests and demonstrations are rights in a democracy. But the Orange and its voters would like to abolish these rights and with them democracy too! USA is on the way to a totalitarian state!

Can or cannot is irrelevant. Law is based on precedent and this has already been established (sorry cannot give you case reference of a few years ago) This officer is legally in the wrong.

Any training by police etc would tell you never to stand in front of a vehicle. He either missed that class or was sure he knew more than who took the class.

This was not a violent happening until this officer escalated it . Officers at the scene could merely have taken her registration number and gone to her residence later with a warrant and arrested her if they thought she had broken the law. Situation solved nobody dead.

When a high-ranking administration official like the President, VP or Noem appears to make a final judgment of "guilt" or "justification" in a lethal force incident before all facts are gathered, it is widely viewed as a red flag for prioritizing a political narrative or loyalty over the thorough, impartial investigation that due process demands.

1 hour ago, Effective altruism said:

Yes, she was.

How, pray tell, was she 'interfering'? She was sitting in a parked car. Yes, the car was partially blocking the road--something for local traffic police to handle--they have the legal authority to do this, NOT ICE. Repeat, ICE has no legal authority whatsoever to handle traffic matters.

Could the agents drive around her car, as others did, and continue on their donut run, not 'interfered' with? Yes. Did the agents have the legal authority to approach her car? No. They had no warrant and no reasonable cause to suspect an immigration violation. Although it's been trampled to death by ICE agents going rogue and breaking the law, as it was also done in this case, ICE agents can only legally engage with one of those two things: warrant or reasonable cause. They had neither.

By approaching the Good vehicle with neither of these, they broke the law. The agents then also broke a number of ICE rules and regulations regarding engagement, including not placing yourself in front of a vehicle, creating a target, not firing at a moving vehicle, etc. The final rule break, of course, was firing point blank at an unarmed citizen from the side of the car when, at that point, the agent was in no danger at all. That's murder, no matter how MAGA tries to deny it.

37 minutes ago, Hamus Yaigh said:

When a high-ranking administration official like the President, VP or Noem appears to make a final judgment of "guilt" or "justification" in a lethal force incident before all facts are gathered, it is widely viewed as a red flag for prioritizing a political narrative or loyalty over the thorough, impartial investigation that due process demands.

But most -- if not all -- of these pronouncements on Truth Social etc. to date have been calling people guilty when they might be innocent rather than this case of calling someone innocent when they might be guilty -- and the DoJ is in sole control the federal indictment mechanism.

49 minutes ago, BerndD said:

Yes, protests and demonstrations are rights in a democracy. But the Orange and its voters would like to abolish these rights and with them democracy too! USA is on the way to a totalitarian state!

You have a right to protest and demonstrate legally.

You do not have the right to block traffic, block sidewalks or businesses, damage property, throw rocks and bottles, assault people, and no one has the right to interfere with federal officers doing their jobs.

The left seems to think that their rights supersede the rights of people they disagree with.

1 hour ago, transam said:

🤣..............So funny..............🤣

The woman gets executed, and you bring up violating federal law............🤣

I think at you age you need a vision check. It will help a little but you still wont understand the facts and the law.