frankendat

Realize, as much as liberals hate it (I don't understand) the following is a "justified" kill. Why is this so hard to comprehend?

There is a lot going on in this response, but then there is a lot going on in the USA. Limited avenues of situation control: "When the police historically would approach a protest, protesters would do their thing and end up getting arrested." Historically, police have been respected if not feared or feared if not respected. I know police who were in Detroit and Lansing riots of the late 1960's and the "peaceful" protests of Viet Nam. I do not recall a story where they pulled their firearms to disperse a crowd, but there were many times some hippy with a smart mouth was beaten to a point, where it even gave me pause. Like I said before, the ability to physically sanction, saved lives, but that ability was abused, that ship has sailed, I do see a route to reinstate it. "Time out"/talk it out" Culture I frequently draw the comparison to parents and teachers dealing with children, as I believe this lack of respect of fear of authority has been groomed into Americans in general since Generation X. I am distrustful of all authority and respect very little, but I have been beaten enough times to hesitate before mouthing the check that my ass would rather not cash. Which is why I endorse and support corporal punishment for young children. When a parent provides a final command, in the tone that denotes instantly comply and compliance is not instant, there should be no further negotiation. Instant painful sanction should commence. The lesson provided, "some lines are not to be crossed". The lesson is necessary, because as adults there are lines that if crossed cost lives. The world of the shot protester failed to teach her that rule. The shot protester was scared. America should not bow to the feelings of fools. If tomorrow I decide that the gun grabbing left has made too much headway in destroying the 2nd Amendment and thereby my America, and mount a revolutionary attack on the State capital, because I fear my government, I am doubtful of sympathy, when I am dispatched. She choose her story The most critical or damning evidence against the shot protester is that she volunteered to interject herself between Federal agents and those the agents were attempting to engage. She left her home to "stop" ICE. There are methods to stop Federal agencies, none of which, condone or even suggest physical confrontation. The Emeritus Act I do not believe the Emeritus Act was written to stop Federal forces from killing civilian fools. The situation in Minnesota has more in common with the school segregation deployment of Federal forces than the Federal force debacle of Ruby Ridge. Minnesota is openly defying Federal law. Elected officials in Minnesota are stating to the national media, in no uncertain terms, they refuse to comply. The discussion is now the sanction. The blue team demands no sanction or a time out, the red team is calling for a spanking.

I do not think this was a "good shoot", but I do not think it was a "bad shoot" either. Disparaged or belittled for sexual or political orientation or weight, or haircut, or intelligence or anything else is status quo in the U.S.A. I certainly think very little of very many "human" beings. (It is possible to forfeit one's humanity)These are children raised without bright line rules. These are the children screaming at the supermarket without repercussion. These are the teenagers stealing with impunity. She was only required to comply and not compliance in some untoward manner, or requiring inappropriate actions. She needed to stop. Stop fighting, stop resisting, stop attempting to flee-stop. She could have even continued to run her mouth and call any and all of those involved, every name imaginable and I would oppose any action taken against her and would protest on her behalf, if she was harmed. And I wouldn't like it much, because, in a better world, running your mouth should cost. Hopefully, but doubtfully, this will give some wanna-be super protester searching for content for his Instagram pause, before attempting to illicit reaction from strangers (or armed strangers) My patience has been spent.

She was successful.

Cheap shot? The face stopping fist line is funny. It is violation of Federal Law to interfere or obstruct a Federal Officer. If you go back in this thread, my position is that she should not have been shot. I support her being tazed, drug from her vehicle and beaten, maced, struck with a baton in the face while seated in her car, but the United States is too soft to understand the former are life saving options and she is dead. It is stupid to argue legal nuance in this type of situation. Wannabe lawyers trying to convince police of their "rights" is a daily if not hourly argument for those who enforce the rules. Comply and fight it in court is the way to stay alive. To refuse an unlawful search and seizure you state clearly and plainly that you do not consent to search of your property or your person. If the search is determined (by a court of law) to have been unlawful and you did not consent, anything discovered during said search is inadmissible. That is how one exercises the right to refuse search and seizure under the 4th Amendment. Nothing in the law, supports physical confrontation, evading, or escape is acceptable, quite the contrary, the law protects the police, so long as they can show a good faith reason for intervention/confrontation, even if that reason is later proven incorrect. My interpretation thusfar holds true as the courts are denying prosecution or review of this incident for Constitutional violations. Maybe you're right, maybe if I took a day and went down to the law library, I would find more information supporting your position than mine, but it would be a matter of interpretation and there would be ample supporting documentation for my side. Bottom line, whatever you believe are your "rights" in a vehicle stop, traffic or otherwise-hands on the steering wheel at 10/2, do not move suddenly or without permission, be respectful, especially if you are refusing to comply. Do not resist physically, you should continue to calmly and clearly state your objections to any unwanted action (remember this is being recorded). She went to the location to "help" by stopping ICE from performing their assigned duties. She went looking for a fight. She went looking for a fight with armed individuals and she found one. Her death is not worthy of remorse.

Agreed. Similar to those who take the M4 and bob the barrel, forgetting the only claim to fame for the baby bullet is velocity and they cut that.

Officer I want that man arrested for repeatedly stopping my fist with his face. -the paradime defense

Northwestern Law professor Paul Gowder decodes the signal: The courts established ordinary measures cannot succeed when states organize systematic resistance. They certified that regular law enforcement has become impracticable. They documented the exact threshold Section 332 requires. The founders designed a system that assumed conflict between federal and state authority. For decades, that friction was suppressed. Emergency powers normalized after 9/11, federal agencies expanded into state domains, courts deferred to administrative expertise. The Guard deployment battles weren’t system failure. They were constitutional gravity reasserting itself. Courts blocking deployments under Posse Comitatus didn’t weaken Trump’s position. They certified that ordinary measures had become impracticable, crossing Section 332’s threshold. December 31, 2025. Trump announces Guard withdrawal from Chicago, Los Angeles, and Portland via Truth Social. Governor Newsom celebrates: “President Trump has finally admitted defeat.” But the machine’s interpretation misreads strategic repositioning as retreat. You cannot claim ordinary measures have been exhausted if contested forces remain deployed. Pull back. Let obstruction resume unchecked. Document the refusal. Then demonstrate what unilateral executive action looks like when constitutional authority aligns. THE DEMONSTRATION January 3, 2026. Maduro extracted. No congressional briefing. No allied consultation. SDNY unseals a narcoterrorism indictment. Filing cabinet heading to New York with twenty-five years of receipts. Congress wasn’t briefed. Allies weren’t consulted. The operation executed on presidential authority alone. Then two days later (last night), aboard Air Force One, POTUS responds to questions about crime in Democrat-run cities: Used. The word choice matters. Invoked suggests consideration. Used suggests deployment. The next triggering event, another federal agent detained, another governor proclamation shielding criminal networks, launches the formal dispersal order under Section 334. The 72-hour window begins. When obstruction continues, federal troops move under the Insurrection Act. Constitutional authority. Historically unreviewable under Trump v. United States. THE HIDDEN NETWORKS Intelligence sources describe what the roundups since fall 2025 actually target. Embedded cartel operatives running fentanyl distribution chains under state-level protection. The riots following military arrests aren’t organic resistance. They’re funded backlash from criminal enterprises losing billions. Pre-staged materials appear at protest sites. Simultaneous actions coordinate across jurisdictions. The coordination runs deeper. Federal employee networks across multiple agencies held Zoom training sessions in early 2025. Officials with verified government IDs discussed “non-cooperation as non-violent direct action,” the 3.5% rule for governmental collapse, and infrastructure sabotage through coordinated sick calls. They planned to make federal law enforcement impracticable. The exact language Section 332 requires. Sanctuary policies exist because cartel operations generate billions flowing through state systems. Governors sit on nonprofit boards receiving federal grants. Those nonprofits contract back to state agencies, cycling federal dollars through “charitable” organizations. Cartel cash launders through these same construction and real estate networks. When Trump’s operations extract high-value targets, they disrupt the business model. The Machine defends itself through coordinated obstruction designed to make federal enforcement impracticable. This transcends immigration policy. This tests whether states can capture governance for criminal enterprises and nullify federal supremacy. THE LINCOLN PARALLEL Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation confounded supporters and critics alike. Abolitionists expected moral thunder. Instead they received dry legalese about “military necessity” and “war powers.” The document deliberately avoided the word “freedom.” It specified which states, parishes, counties. It exempted border states still in the Union. Constitutional historians recognize the genius. Lincoln wasn’t making a moral proclamation. He was establishing irreversible legal predicate under war powers. Once issued, even Northern defeat couldn’t fully restore slavery. The proclamation made restoration of the old order structurally impossible. Trump’s April 28 order follows identical construction. Critics expected immigration rhetoric. Instead: technical language about “unlawful insurrection” and “federal supremacy.” Specified sanctuary jurisdictions, formal notification procedures, funding suspensions. Avoided inflammatory language. Constitutional attorneys recognize the structure. Irreversible legal predicate under insurrection powers. Even political defeat cannot fully restore sanctuary authority. States would have to prove they’re not in systematic insurrection. Both presidents disguised constitutional warfare as administrative procedure. THE COMPLETE RECORD When you review the eight-month timeline you recognize what most ‘experts’ miss. The April 28 EO satisfied every Section 334 requirement. It designated sanctuary conduct as insurrection. It provided formal notification. It established consequences. It granted eight months to comply. Compliance never arrived. California and New York passed laws shielding criminal networks. Illinois officials threatened to prosecute ICE agents. Multiple states coordinated legal defenses against federal authority. Courts blocked every standard enforcement attempt. They certified that ordinary measures have become impracticable. Every statutory requirement checks complete: Formal proclamation warning insurgents to disperse: April 28, 2025 Executive Order 14287 Extended opportunity to comply: Eight months from April to December 2025 Documented systematic multi-state obstruction: Sanctuary laws, prosecution threats, coordinated resistance Exhausted ordinary enforcement measures: Guard deployments blocked by federal courts Judicial certification of impracticability: Supreme Court ruling with Kavanaugh footnote The legal architecture stands finished. The predicate has been established. Only the final triggering event remains. Thomas Jefferson signed the Insurrection Act into law on March 3, 1807. He understood executive authority: forge the instrument ahead of the storm, then await the conditions that justify its use. Abraham Lincoln used it to preserve the Union when eleven states organized systematic resistance. Ulysses S. Grant invoked it to shatter the Ku Klux Klan when Southern governments refused to protect Black citizens. Dwight Eisenhower deployed federal troops to enforce Brown v. Board when Arkansas chose defiance. Each invocation followed the same pattern. Local authorities refuse to enforce federal law. The president issues formal proclamation. Forces deploy when resistance continues. The current situation exceeds every historical precedent in scale and coordination. Multiple state governments coordinating systematic obstruction. Sanctuary jurisdictions spanning dozens of cities. Criminal enterprises funding the resistance through captured state institutions. The April proclamation gave them eight months to stand down. They chose escalation. THE COUNTDOWN The January 4 statement confirms what the legal timeline already established. Prerequisites met. Constitutional threshold crossed and judicially certified. The operational timeline is active. The next escalation triggers the formal dispersal order. Section 334 requires the president issue proclamation ordering insurgents to “disperse and retire peaceably to their abodes” before deploying military force. That’s the legal tripwire. Once issued, if obstruction persists after the compliance window closes, federal troops can enforce federal law. Active duty forces under the Insurrection Act. Constitutional. Unreviewable. The forces won’t conduct door-to-door immigration raids. They’ll provide security perimeters while federal law enforcement executes targeted operations against high-value assets. Operatives. Trafficking nodes. Criminal infrastructure. Targeting oath-bound officials elected and appointed, as well as federal employees who swore to uphold federal law and chose insurrection instead. THE RESTORATION Sanctuary jurisdictions received explicit insurrection warnings last spring. More than half a year to comply. Every olive branch rejected. Courts blocked ordinary enforcement repeatedly, certifying impracticability. The Venezuela op demonstrated unilateral resolve. Yesterday’s statement activated the operational sequence. Pattern recognized. Machine is exposed. Evidence is complete. What remains is execution. They’re just waiting to hear it tick. The most powerful weapon restrains until every prerequisite aligns. Until mercy extends fully and meets systematic rejection. Until the constitutional framework demands its use. Every prerequisite has aligned. Mercy has been extended and rejected. The framework demands its use. Revolution destroys. Reversion restores. The Emancipation Proclamation freed slaves. The Insurrection Proclamation frees a republic. Happy Monday. Thank you for reading this, for sharing it, and for supporting this work. Pattern recognition requires people willing to see what’s actually there instead of what they’ve been told to see. You’re doing just that. One attachment • Scanned by Gmail I know it is likely propagandized horseshit, but I like it.

But this wasn't "life and death". This was not the Watts riots or the L.A. Riots or the like. The officers were not protecting the public from a raging gunman or even an individual set on driving their car into a group of people. The stupid, ignorant, now dead bitch was trying to get away. The officers should have disengaged and moved out of harms way, called in her plate and gone to her house and arrested her. Or, but again I do not see the justification for this, the officers could call in a patrol car and performed a pit move as she tried to leave the area. It wasn't war. There was not a line that needed to be held to protect the community. And look, I do not feel sad the woman was killed, in fact it is unfortunate her partner was shot as well. I don't like stupid liberals, but I hate whining toughs who only feel emboldened because others stand up for them. What's going to happen is what always happens, this certainly will not rise to a criminal action. A cop might get fired for public appeasement, a big civil suit that will be settled out of court, with a provision for "officer training on deescalation" all sides will claim victory. The only sad part of it, is if we still lived in an age when a mouthy disrespectful child caught a swift backhand, they wouldn't grow up to believe in a world without swift severe sanction and the mouthy bitch would still be alive.

We may debate the best way of reformation, but denying immigration reform is very much needed is stupidity.

I support ICE in theory. I support police in theory, but this was bad call on behalf of the police. So much a bad call that if I were a police chief I would make it new standard protocol, if an officer finds themselves in a similar situation, knuckle-up and get run over or lose your job. There was no reasonable justification for the use of deadly force. BUT, I would also, bring back heavy handed policing. Driver bitch and her mouthy kid needed to be put down hard. I shed no tears for non-compliant assholes who get beat, even severely. All this civil entitlement bullshit comes from parents who refused to spank their children. No amount of community building, neighborhood policing, friendly enforcement, will erase the past indiscretions of our enforcement arm. So, stop trying. Body cams, dash cams, this will not entail a return of the bad old days and it will not make your average citizen respect the police-like I said, those days are gone, but it will make police feared and with that fear comes compliance and they ability to do the job more effectively. Search youtube for a second and you will find 1000's of police/citizen interaction videos, security guard/citizen interaction videos, and you will see the overwhelming number of jackasses fucking around and NOT finding out. Which, I theorize emboldened this lady to confront police in the street. Regardless, the police are in the wrong and should be held accountable.

Not sure what you are counting as civilizations/empires 500 was the average.

Check your sources, Romans lasted over 500 years, a quick google search backs up your 250 claim, but if you dig deeper it is closer to 500 years. What aggravates if I was in charge I could guarantee another 100 (probably more but I wouldn't guarantee) of good times, good economy and good living for Americans. America is only a bully to those who are soft. America has fought every war starting with Korea with one hand tied around her balls. (Lady Liberty the first transgender) Before, America goes gently into that good night, I believe we will go biblical.

I appreciate a reasoned retort. If Canadian companies (and thereby the government as there is less distinction between what is private and what is government in Canada) are invaded by China or Russia or better yet, China/and/or/Russia begin courting the Inuits (How much of Canada is "stolen" land) Nomadic villages suddenly flush with diesel generators and super sized track tundra vehicles (and suddenly heavily armed) Different Nomadic tribes (backed by different groups) attempting to unify and control the majority of Canada's undeveloped land. Occasionally, small towns on the edge are sacked, there are pockets of fighting between the Inuits and the Canadian government, which has taken interest and dispatched forces. Of course the USA has pledged assistance to Canada and many Canadians wonder why the assistance is not quickly and openly accepted. The USA has demonstrated ability to handle these types of situations. BUT, behind the scenes China has been greasing political wheels and filling pockets, socialism and communism are close bedfellows and some promote a greater connection with China's ideals than the USA. Canada sides with China, USA stages a small invasion to kill the proponents of the Canada China collaboration. As evidenced with the Cuban Missile Crisis, the USA will not tolerate China or Russia on our doorstep. Canada could choose to fight, that would be unfortunate, as their only hope would be nuclear. At which point, the best option for the people of the USA, would be preemptive strike against China, (possibly, but unlikely France) and a Canadian genocide. The best option for anyone planning or wanting to live through the war, learn to speak Spanish, or Russian. Food for thought: The reason Canada is not a decentralized, exploited mess, is the other players in the resources game do not wish to engage in a direct advance on what is so close to the USA

If Canada had the oil reserves of Venezuela, the world, especially Canada, would be a very different place. Could Canada's quasi socialism survive the influx of greed, such a finding would yield? Power corrupts and oil would bring power, would it be enough, or would Canada start to build an arsenal to flex on the world stage? There will always be a good excuse for invasion of an oil rich country! The United States is built on individual freedom/democracy is best and there are strong arguments for this position. There are also arguments against, which the United States ignores. The same as for people, when a country has something of value, other countries try to take it. Oil has value and China, Russia, the USA, drug cartels, etc. wish to take it. What the pansies and Democrats try to downplay or ignore is no amount of hand wringing and gnashing of teeth will prevent the oil from being took. My discord is America will not own it's destiny. Do we believe Democracy and individual liberty is the best possible form of governance? Then we should support installing it in the world. If between China, Russia, Arabs, drug cartels, the USA is the best option for the majority, then the majority should rise up and be begging for assistance and to come under the umbrella of protection of Uncle Sam. But do not beg for help and then try to fuck lady liberty at the first chance, that game has been played out. I agree it is a principle of America to help the suffering, but the suffering are then beholden. World domination should pay for itself.