Trump Has Changed And TDS With Him

January 9, 2026

When Trump did win his second term there were many people, including here, who were a bit in panic. Other characterized that as a ‘Trump Derangement Syndrome’ (TDS).

I had preferred Trump over the blabbering incompetent person the Democrats had put up as their candidate. I did not like Trump’s policies but I also thought that he would do just minor damage just like during his first term in office.

At first it looked like I had been right. The Alaska meeting with President Putin went reasonably well. The war in Ukraine seemed to move towards some sane outcome. His domestic policies were a bit wild but not far off from the expected trajectory.

Things have been going downward since. Something has definitely changed. But why and how this derangement happened is yet unknown.

The late December CIA attack on Putin’s residence in the Novgorod region, which includes strategic command facilities, has broken the rules that have governed relations between nuclear powers over many decades. Those relations have now deteriorated beyond fixing.

The attack on Venezuela was likewise beyond any reasonability. There is little chance that the U.S. will ever get what it wants from the country without on the ground intervention. But any commitment of troops to Caracas would end in disaster.

The administration defense of ICE goons, who clearly broke all rules of policing when they killed an innocent women, is also beyond all reasonability. There are certainly ways to explain the incident but they decided to smear the obvious victim.

That such behavior has become and will stay the norm for the Trump administration can be concluded from two recent interviews.

The first was on January 5 at CNN with Trump aide Stephen Miller:

TAPPER: So let’s — the question about who is now running Venezuela is one that even members of Congress who are big Trump supporters say they’re not quite sure about. Senate Majority Leader John Thune told CNN’s Manu Raju that he doesn’t know what President Trump meant by his assertion that the U.S. is running Venezuela. And he said he needs more information. Can you tell us what the President means when he says, is acting President Delcy Rodriguez in charge? Is she running Venezuela or not?

MILLER: Well, what the President said is true. The United States of America is running Venezuela. By definition, that’s true. Jake, we live in a law, I’m sorry, we live in a world in which you can talk all you want about international niceties and everything else, but we live in a world, in the real world, Jake, that is governed by strength, that is governed by force, that is governed by power. These are the iron laws of the world that have existed since the beginning of time. The United States —

TAPPER: But are you saying — but in terms of day-to-day operations in Venezuela, that is president, Acting President Rodriguez, right? It’s not some sort of American emissary.

MILLER: No, what I’m saying is, and we’ll keep going here, Jake. So I want to say what I’m saying, and then you’ll follow up. But what I’m saying is just one level above that, which is that, by definition, we are in charge because we have the United States military stationed outside the country. We set the terms and conditions. We have a complete embargo on all of their oil and their ability to do commerce.

So for them to do commerce, they need our permission. For them to be able to run an economy, they need our permission. So the United States is in charge. The United States is running the country during this transition period.

Miller really seems to believe that this is how the world works. It isn’t.

The second interview, on January 7, was by the NY Times with Trump himself:

Trump Lays Out a Vision of Power Restrained Only by ‘My Own Morality’ (archived)

The relevant excerpt of craziness:

Asked in a wide-ranging interview with The New York Times if there were any limits on his global powers, Mr. Trump said: “Yeah, there is one thing. My own morality. My own mind. It’s the only thing that can stop me.”

“I don’t need international law,” he added. “I’m not looking to hurt people.”

When pressed further about whether his administration needed to abide by international law, Mr. Trump said, “I do.” But he made clear he would be the arbiter when such constraints applied to the United States.

“It depends what your definition of international law is,” he said.

Mr. Trump’s assessment of his own freedom to use any instrument of military, economic or political power to cement American supremacy was the most blunt acknowledgment yet of his worldview. At its core is the concept that national strength, rather than laws, treaties and conventions, should be the deciding factor as powers collide.

Trump’s take on domestic limits exposes a similar might-makes-right vision:

On the domestic front, Mr. Trump suggested that judges only have power to restrict his domestic policy agenda — from the deployment of the National Guard to the imposition of tariffs — “under certain circumstances.”

But he was already considering workarounds. He raised the possibility that if his tariffs issued under emergency authorities were struck down by the Supreme Court, he could repackage them as licensing fees. And Mr. Trump, who said he was elected to restore law and order, reiterated that he was willing to invoke the Insurrection Act and deploy the military inside the United States and federalize some National Guard units if he felt it was important to do so.

So far, he said, “I haven’t really felt the need to do it.”

TDS has changed its meaning. Trump is deranged and its not just a syndrome. I have yet to make up my mind of what is most likely to follow from this.

Is the U.S. sliding down the path towards full fascism? Or is this all pure bluster that will end as soon as it experience a serious bulwark?

Posted by b on January 9, 2026 at 14:08 UTC | Permalink

Comments

Scene: In a parallel universe, where the internet had already been invented in 1933, the National Zionist (short: Nazi) government in Germerica, under their leader Strumpf, declared there are too many undesirables in the country. Laws were passed, ie. Decree of the Reich President for the Protection of People and State, that would allow a specially established police force, called GESTICE, to arrest and detain people without due process, rounding up all those deemed unwelcome and stick them into concentration camps with horrendous conditions, even ones guarded by alligators in the Germerican everglades.

Now, somewhat surprising to supporters of the Nazi government, who voted in the Nazis just so that they would deal with the undesirables, there were some Germericans who felt this was inhumane and cruel, who started to speak out and protest GESTICE’s heavy handed jackboot tactics. Of course, the Nazis and their supporters said “eat shit you commie loving whingers, we’re in power now, get used to it”.

And so the snatching of those branded undesirable from the streets by armed, often masked men in unmarked cars, continued. The Nazis even went as far as to snatch foreign countries presidents and their wives, killing 100 foreigners in the operation, and put them on show trials for ostensibly something drug or the other, when in reality all they wanted was the countries’ resources.

Then, one day in Germerica, during a Gestice raid, a supposedly commie loving woman, her name was Renee Sophie Scholl Good, was sitting in her car near the blitz. No one knows exactly why. Was she just dropping her partner off who wanted to protest the raid and make fun of the masked Gestice heavies, was she herself trying to obstruct the operation, no one knows. At any rate, multiple Gestice raiders approached her car, each yelling different commands at her, she tries to drive away, possibly slightly bumping into one of them, hard to tell from the videos circulating, who then pulls his gun and blows with three shots her head off, calling her a “fuckin bitch” as the car with her slumped over careens into a street pole.

In the immediate aftermath, while two Gestice men are fist bumping each other, a doctor who happened to be near by is refused access to the woman by Gestice, and so it takes another 15 minutes for the ambulance to arrive at the by then dead body.

The Nazi president, his vice fuhrer, and government reps call the dead woman a terrorist, applauding the Gestice for a job well done, and promise to come down hard on anyone not sufficiently sympathetic to Gestice and the Nazi rule. The undesirables must go, and if you so happen to stand in Gestice’s way you are dead meat.

A day or so after the incident, on a political blog, the incident is being discussed. There are those who argue the Nazis and Gestice have lost the plot, a danger to the country and the rest of the world, and there are those who take the Nazi’s side, asserting

She just got shot in the face which is what happens within seconds of you doing stupid things like not obeying an order a masked Gestice raider is yelling.
It is GESTICE law enforcement that is “authorized” by Germerica’s Decree of the Reich President for the Protection of People and State to carry out actions to detain undesirables. No one has a legal right to interfere with law enforcement activities.
if you think that Gestice should act differently – why don’t you go do that job?

And so, some readers of the blog are asking themselves, heck, why don’t I go and do that job? Why don’t I round up people the Nazis have declared deplorable, and should women in cars be in the way and don’t immediately follow my orders kill them by shooting them in the face? What stops me from doing that?… And then it hits them. Their conscience. Their moral fiber which won’t allow them to grab people off the street, tear families apart, cart without due process potentially innocent people to concentration camps, assist in deporting them to hell on earth places like CECOT. Their inability to draw a gun and shoot women in the head without feeling violently ill afterwards and for the rest of their lives. Thats whats stops them.

In this parallel universe, the Nazis and their totenkopf troops have another 3 years before at the the next election they might get turfed out. There mightn’t be enough Germericans left supporting them and their fascist machinations. The other Nazi party, who also is into killing women and children, especially those their friends in Zioland deem undesirable, might have more support.

But hey, the Strump Nazi party and its hangers-on know, even if they lose, no biggie, they will rule again. Only a matter of time. No matter which universe one lives in.

Posted by: Juan Moment | Jan 11 2026 4:18 utc | 601

@ Juan Moment | Jan 11 2026 4:18 utc | 604

well written and a good parallel to what is happening here juan… hopefully it is cause from some reflection on the part of others… i am not counting on it, but thanks regardless…

Posted by: james | Jan 11 2026 4:50 utc | 602

@B: There were multiple warnings / reports that were published BEFORE the re-election of Trump in november 2024 that warned of all the changes that were “in the pipeline” for the US as a result of “Project 2025”.

E.g.:
– “Project 2025: The Plan For Trump’s Second Term Is Truly Terrifying | Melissa Gira Grant” : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8oSD-jx0GI (23 minutes).

– “Heritage Foundation Posts Racist Video About Palestinians, Says They Should Not Be Allowed Into US” : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c9xmHwaN39w (13 minutes).

Posted by: WMG | Jan 11 2026 5:10 utc | 603

see the 45:03 video at the link

https://gilbertdoctorow.com/2026/01/09/conversation-with-professor-glenn-diesen-9-january-2026-russias-oreshnik-strike-in-warning-to-nato/
Conversation with Professor Glenn Diesen, 9 January 2026: Russia’s Oreshnik Strike in Warning to NATO

This afternoon’s chat with Professor Diesen presented our best efforts to make sense of the torrent of breaking news this past seven days. Much of this news was generated by Donald Trump and related to his attack on Venezuela, his threats to take Greenland by force and American piracy on the high seas involving the capture of a Russian-flagged oil tanker traveling just south of Iceland.

But in the last 24 hours, Vladimir Putin stole Trump’s thunder by a dramatic strike on critical energy infrastructure of Ukraine, reportedly the country’s largest gas storage facility, using its Oreshnik hypersonic missile. Not only did Russia destroy a facility representing half of Ukraine’s natural gas storage but this was done in the neighborhood of Lvov, in the very West of the country, just 70 km from the Polish border, thereby sending an unmistakable message to NATO countries about their vulnerability to this unstoppable Russian armament.

The conversation moved from this essentially new development to the long-standing issues o where the war is headed, what kind of outcome may we expect and in what time period, whether there will be any further Trump brokered peace talks and much more.

Throughout I insisted on Trump’s inscrutability and use of prevarication to keep us all confounded. And I took note of Putin’s long-awaited decisive action to put the fear of God into Europeans by demonstrating that Russia has not only the wherewithal but also the will to defend its interests.

Posted by: michaelj72 | Jan 11 2026 5:54 utc | 604

Posted by: james | Jan 11 2026 4:06 utc | 600

#####

No accountability is to be expected when people do not recognize a higher authority.

What human can bring Trump into line? Who has the means and clout to impose sanctions on his kidnapping and murders?

Men are lousy stewards of men.

Posted by: LoveDonbass | Jan 11 2026 6:25 utc | 605

Posted by: c1ue | Jan 11 2026 1:57 utc | 586

First of all, thanks for the time you took to reply to my arguments.

It doesn’t matter that he was not in front of the car when he shot.

For criminal investigation to assess the level of threat, it does.

All that matters is that he feels threatened when he was in front of the car.

When you’re a law enforcement officer filming some people with your phone, it doesn’t indicate a high level of fear. All that matters is how he can control his feelings in such a situation.

That’s what you don’t get. A law enforcement officer, that feels threatened, is empowered to shoot to protect his own life.

I get it, I get it. And I can, if not understand, try to imagine the level of stress in criminal situation, confronted with individuals who may carry. As James stated it, the American society became paranoid, even when facing harmless women. A LE officer has rights but he also have duties. You have the right to shoot if you feel threatened but you have the duty to properly assess the level of threat not to shoot people like pigeons in a balltrap.

It is easy for people like you, who likely have never been in situations where their life and safety are literally under threat, to criticize the actions of someone who is in such a situation.

Right, but so what ? There are many police officers, army veterans online who severely criticised his decision to shoot and who said it was totally unjustified. My critics are not based on what I know, it is based on what experts on dealing with violence are saying.

I note yet again, that the officer in question was actually injured by a car previously.

Again, the guy literally throw himself at the car with a phone in his hand. And about the previous story. Yes, apparently, he was dragged by a car on that occasion, but he didn’t kill the driver, he tased him. So why did he chose to draw his weapon instead of his taser in a much less dangerous situation ?

It is also a fact that the woman was told to stop the car and get out

It is also a fact that she was told to drive the fuck away. You cannot expect anyone who has no experience in dealing with high level of stress to react properly in such a situation. Ffs, even the agent didn’t manage his own feelings ! How come anyone demands that she should have ?

But I equally think that it is extremely unlikely that the officer acted in any way, outside of his own rights and guidelines to behavior.

Well, I have no doubt he won’t be charged. But it says a lot about your actual society.

Posted by: xiao pignouf | Jan 11 2026 9:17 utc | 606

Posted by: Juan Moment | Jan 10 2026 12:51 utc | 436

It would show that the corpse of the American electorate still has a heartbeat, that it isn’t dead yet, that there is chance, however small,…

Yeah, and for the record…

…in 2008 it was clear to me that Barrack Obama was going to be really bad news. I voted for Cynthia McKinney, who was running on the Green ticket. She won 0.12% of the popular vote. She was controversially vocal on the major issues of the day. From her anti-war stance, to 911 transparency, to Hurricane Katrina activism, to her impeach Bush initiative, to her MLK records act initiative, and even her efforts to bring clarity to the murder of Tupak Shakur. A six-term congresswoman from Georgia, she was the truest spirit of the left to ever walk those caustic halls.

Well, I stopped voting, and in the ensuing years sadly watched as she was gradually deplatformed, eventually ending up(last I heard) teaching at North South University in Dhaka, Bangladesh.

Last election I changed my policy and cast another useless vote, for Stein this time, who, in all honesty, doesn’t do much for me. She won 0.4% of the popular vote.

So yeah, I guess the corpse of the American electorate still has a heartbeat.

Posted by: john | Jan 11 2026 11:21 utc | 607

“So yeah, I guess the corpse of the American electorate still has a heartbeat.”

Those numbers are so bogus. If real data over decades of elections was collated rather than disappeared, those ludicrous results would be glaring.
Entire purpose of election rigging is knocking those real left or outside candidates down, down, down. Almost certainly you would see less disparities in the right wing nutjob candidates outside of the select sort.
One of the fruits of California Energy Deregulation measures pushed through as reform and competition to reduce prices in order to “game” the electrical grid and rob Californians (a sweet proposition for Texans and much of America with a hard bias against the land of fruits and nuts) was the Total Recall scam used to remove Gray Davis in favor of Ahnold. All to protect the stolen receipts.
Only two elements took place in that voting booth. A driving while brown ballot measure and the do you think and if so quick change election.
Driving while brown was very successful. Indicating a sort of response you might expect from the recall question in support of Davis and Bustamante (the heir apparent) and the numbers presented for the well over 100 namealike, nobody, random and desperate celebrity candidacies indicated some highly unlikely activities in very low vote total candidates. It was queer.

and just a taste of what they can do.

Posted by: Not Ewe | Jan 11 2026 13:26 utc | 608

You kind of disqualify yourself by referring ICE agents as pigs. Posted by: Jane | Jan 10 2026 21:10 utc | 554

OK iSSe goons. Not any different than Gestapo and similar ilk.

Posted by: MAKK | Jan 11 2026 14:09 utc | 609

I would just like to point out to any TDS sufferers out there that if you folks hadn’t gone so totally off the rails over his first election, he’d be gone by now…

Think about that for a moment. Maybe a change in strategy is in order, huh? Because I don’t think that a sequel to the “Summer of Love” will sell as many tickets as the first one did.

How about this time you just let the man do his term, speak out against him where you must, but focus on what YOU are going to do (and HOW you mean to do it), and try picking a candidate who is actually qualified for the job? And who can get your message across without ever uttering the name Trump?

Democrat political speeches all sound like that scene at the end of Bill and Ted’s Excellent Adventure, where the football jocks little skit gets no interest, until one jock yells out “San Dimas High School football RULES!”, and the audience goes wild…it’s a crowd-pleaser for sure.

Posted by: Bemused Observer | Jan 11 2026 14:45 utc | 610

To Archetypex, Jane and cru1e who were my main detractors on the topic of Good’s killing.

A new video surfaced that contradicts my point of view :

– The agent was indeed hit by the car
– He was filming with his left hand

What does it change ? That cru1e was closer to the truth than I was. Also, the certainty that the agent won’t be charged for legal reasons because it will be considered as self-defense.

What doesn’t it change ? It won’t change my differences with Jane and Archetypex, but they’re mainly based on an ideological ground. I still disagree with what the ICE officer did on a moral stand even if he had all legal rights to do it.

I explain.

If we compare the Good’s vs ICE agent situation with soldiers or law enforcement officers dealing with hostiles on a war zone or a criminal situation where there’s a very high probability they’ll face armed opponents, it is clear that the women involved in the Minneapolis incident didn’t represent such a high level of threat. One can even claim the risk was close to zero. The agent himself by the simple fact he was filming with his phone (and not his bodycam) showed that he didn’t feel any threat around them. In the end, to draw his weapon even if the car was moving and he was hit by it was unnecessary and dangerous. First, it was useless because shooting at the driver won’t stop the car, on the contrary and he was hit because he badly positioned himself, not because Good wanted to ran over him. Second, shooting was dangerous for his teammates and for the bystanders.

He killed her not because she was a threat, but because he was angry or frustrated.

As the lawyer concludes in the video, he will be most definitely acquitted, not for being protected by his administration but because the jury will have all the legal reasons to do it.

But it is still morally wrong.

Posted by: xiao pignouf | Jan 11 2026 15:05 utc | 611

@FeJohn #590
I presume you reference a) that some person, self proclaimed as a doctor, who was prevented from assisting and b) that the agents did not rush over immediately
Regarding a): A trained doctor actually is extremely unlikely to do shit in a trauma situation. If the person had said they were a trauma doctor or an EMT, the situation may well have been different. But some rando wanting to butt in, is nothing more than a future potential lawsuit ie why did you police not prevent this quack from killing this person.
b) Maybe you did not notice, but the environmental situation was not good. The road was icy and slippery – one reason why said SUV spun its tires before accelerating forward. Note again: if the road were not icy, the woman almost certainly would have accelerated slowly because I do not believe she had the intention to ram the ICE officer. The acceleration to compensate for lower friction due to ice, which in no small part arises from friction melting ice and increasing the friction coefficient, is a normal method of starting driving on an icy surface. But it is PRECISELY the wrong thing to do with a law enforcement officers in front of the car. Once again, this was a split second thing – it is easy to point fingers afterwards, but regardless, both “use of deadly force” guidelines and the law are very likely to pronounce that said agent acted legally.
And with an icy surface, nobody is rushing anywhere. Furthermore, law enforcement agents are generally not trained for first aid or emergency trauma care. So what exactly do you expect them to do in this situation? In fact, I believe they are trained NOT to do anything, but to call for EMT and await their arrival.

Posted by: c1ue | Jan 11 2026 17:26 utc | 612

@james #592
You keep harping on weaponization – but this is not the issue here unless you are advocating that police not be armed. Are you?
You clearly are not reading or comprehending what I am saying: the officer almost certainly acted fully within normal law enforcement guidelines governing the use of deadly force.
Which to repeat, is that a law enforcement officer is entitled to use deadly force when he believes that he himself, or someone else, is threatened by unlawful use of deadly force.
If you want to change those guidelines, then push for changes as opposed to complain afterwards. These guidelines have been around for literally 100+ years and equally apply to self defense by civilians/normies.
As for having police officers not be armed: the UK has that. Can’t say that it has helped the public safety situation there at all. I am not a law enforcement officer, but I have worked with many all over the world and know a number personally where I live. I live in a True Blue city that is very safe by American standards (low double digit homicides in 2025). And yet the horrific shit that LE officers experience in this city, is unknown to the vast majority of people. Several of the officers that I know personally, have been significantly injured on the job by violent people.
The notion that even suburban towns in the MidWest are so safe that you don’t need armed police – well, I suspect that actually talking to police there is very likely to reveal a very different story.
You can have wife beaters (including, disproportionately, lesbian ones) anywhere including on your street.
You can have a meth lab on the next street.
There is ugly shit in the world which LE’s job is to insulate the population from – and they have done a pretty good job of it such that people have no fucking idea of what actually happens in the dark corners of their own town.

Posted by: c1ue | Jan 11 2026 17:35 utc | 613

@F. Foundling #599
No, it is not a bogus argument.
It is hypocritical to believe that someone should act as you would act – ex post facto and without personally experiencing the situation, and without having been in a job with the constant possibility of death or serious injury.
I have zero patience for people who think they know better but aren’t actually willing to undergo the actual risks.
Have you ever been in a life threatening situation due to people?
How many people do you personally know, who have been shot? killed? seriously injured?
Have you even ever been in a serious fight – not one of boisterous fools but one in which all parties are seriously trying to hurt the others?
If not, you don’t know shit and I don’t give a fuck what you think.

Posted by: c1ue | Jan 11 2026 17:39 utc | 614

@Juan Moment #604
Cartoonish garbage. Among other things, the Nationalist Socialist party was LIBERAL. LOL.
It was MGGA but with socialism as opposed to conservatism but with the same nationalism.

Posted by: c1ue | Jan 11 2026 17:42 utc | 615

Since many Americans do not travel, and so do not know, the Commonwealth countries did not have armed police patrol in public for the longest time. That only started to change after 2000.

Arming police says a lot about the relationship between a state and its citizens. Any state.

I believe police in China are usually unarmed. Russian police, if they are armed, it is usually very discreet.

Posted by: LoveDonbass | Jan 11 2026 17:47 utc | 616

@xiao pignouf #609
You said

For criminal investigation to assess the level of threat, it does.

No, it does not. You still don’t get it. The law enforcement officer just has to believe, and be able to justify, that he believed that he was under threat of unlawful use of deadly force AT ANY TIME before he shot. That he shot when the direction of the car had swung past him, is a factor but is ultimately irrelevant. The duration of the whole incident, from when the car tires squealed to when the 3rd shot was fired, was literally seconds.

When you’re a law enforcement officer filming some people with your phone, it doesn’t indicate a high level of fear. All that matters is how he can control his feelings in such a situation.

Does not matter what his state was before said officer started to believe he was under unlawful threat of deadly force.

I get it, I get it. And I can, if not understand, try to imagine the level of stress in criminal situation, confronted with individuals who may carry. As James stated it, the American society became paranoid, even when facing harmless women. A LE officer has rights but he also have duties. You have the right to shoot if you feel threatened but you have the duty to properly assess the level of threat not to shoot people like pigeons in a balltrap.

No, you still don’t get it. This wasn’t a harmless woman. This was a woman who was already defying law enforcement commands (ie a criminal) who furthermore was at the helm of a 4000 to 5000+ pound vehicle that is perfectly capable of inflicting bodily harm or death, and who furthermore started accelerating in a potentially dangerous manner.
If there was a child in front of this car and the woman did the same thing, she would be just as liable for endangering the child. This line of reasoning is stupid.

Right, but so what ? There are many police officers, army veterans online who severely criticised his decision to shoot and who said it was totally unjustified. My critics are not based on what I know, it is based on what experts on dealing with violence are saying.

And so what? Police officers and veterans can have political agendas also.
I have yet to hear a legal argument from you as to why this police officer acted improperly.
I have already said that it would have been optimal if the police officer had chosen to accept the unlawful threat of deadly force without acting, but it is not required. And again, it is easy to point fingers after the fact.

Again, the guy literally throw himself at the car with a phone in his hand. And about the previous story. Yes, apparently, he was dragged by a car on that occasion, but he didn’t kill the driver, he tased him. So why did he chose to draw his weapon instead of his taser in a much less dangerous situation ?

This is dumb beyond words. Will a taser penetrate a windshield? And maybe the officer learned from his previous experience: just shoot as he is entitled to rather than get hurt.

It is also a fact that she was told to drive the fuck away. You cannot expect anyone who has no experience in dealing with high level of stress to react properly in such a situation. Ffs, even the agent didn’t manage his own feelings ! How come anyone demands that she should have ?

I agree with your comment on stress, but why was she there at all? Because she was under the wrong impression that she could interfere with ongoing police activity and nothing bad would happen.
That’s on her.
The second error was not thinking that flouncing away in your SUV, could not possibly have consequences. Had she accelerated slowly, she would not have been shot.
That’s also on her.

Well, I have no doubt he won’t be charged. But it says a lot about your actual society.

Sorry, but that is utter bollocks. The use of deadly force guidelines are the same worldwide for armed police. Yes, you can disarm police but that just leads to more societal violence see UK.
As for comments on society: yes, this incident does say a lot about US society: that dumb fucking people will insert themselves into dangerous situations without having any idea of the danger they put themselves in.
Would this woman slap a tiger in the face? Almost certainly not, because she would recognize the danger in doing so.
Armed law enforcement officers are just as dangerous as a tiger.
I don’t fear them, but I respect them and consider my actions around them.
This woman did neither. She did not deserve to die, but she put herself in a situation where it could happen, and then she did shit which made it happen.

Posted by: c1ue | Jan 11 2026 17:57 utc | 617

@xiao pignouf #614

He killed her not because she was a threat, but because he was angry or frustrated.

Objection: you can not possibly have any idea what the office in question felt. Any remotely competent judge would strike this nonsense from the trial record.

As the lawyer concludes in the video, he will be most definitely acquitted, not for being protected by his administration but because the jury will have all the legal reasons to do it.

That lawyer is known primarily for being incompetent. A politician/propagandist as opposed to an actual practitioner.

But it is still morally wrong.

Perhaps, perhaps not. I have repeatedly said that there are things which are legally right but morally wrong, morally right but legally wrong, or legally wrong and morally wrong.
Morality is subjective. I already posted the example of this: do you consider abortion to be murder?
The purpose of law is to minimize subjectivity.

Posted by: c1ue | Jan 11 2026 18:13 utc | 618

@c1ue and the rest of the pig/state apologists.

I hope your next interaction with the Police/ICE/Border Patrol catches the officer on a bad day, that he ‘feels fear’ and acts as you all feel is appropriate to do because he is ‘scared’. May your acceptance of ‘frightened armed coward’ violence towards others be visited upon you.

Posted by: ftp | Jan 11 2026 18:25 utc | 619

[…] the Nationalist Socialist party was LIBERAL. LOL. […]
Posted by: c1ue | Jan 11 2026 17:42 utc | 618

Sure, c1ue, sure. And are those liberal National Socialists in the room with us right now?

It was MGGA but with socialism as opposed to conservatism but with the same nationalism.

You must be one of those who believe Hot Dogs are made of, well, hot dogs.

Posted by: Juan Moment | Jan 11 2026 18:27 utc | 620

Posted by: c1ue | Jan 11 2026 17:57 utc | 620 In addition to all the tedious BS arguments on details, this tries to bolster its non-existent case with flagrant falsifications. Early on, the flat statement that defying police commands is criminal states by the way the heart of the apologists’ case: The police are the masters, obey. Disobedience of any kind is criminal and it is right that the police can kill you because they are the masters. This is about as right wing as you come. These apologies for power have been offered by the servile for centuries, long before modern times. A serf would be a criminal for defying a lord, a slave would be criminal for defying the master, citizen is a criminal for defying a cop. For these people a dead civilian is a sign their system works.

But as I was saying, shameless lies. First, the claim that disarming the police leads to societal violence actually invokes the UK. In fact one of the great steps to decreasing violence in England was disarming the police. This happened under PM Robert Peel, hence the nicknames bobbies and peelers for police. It is the decay of society and the malignant influence of American conservatism that has increased the violence in England. As in the US, one part of that increase in violence is the cops’ crimes. (Yes, not literal crimes, police violence is under color of law.)
A second gross falsification is a little more subtle. Nothing has established the woman was driving at him, nothing has given honest observers any reasons to believe he is being honest about feeling threatened. Every indication is that the woman was starting to drive away, not driving at him. There was no threat of deadly force. Conservatives believe in the presumption of guilt when someone is accused by authority but not fully rational person does. Conservatives further believe that authority never lies, but again, no fully rational person does. Stupid questions about tasers penetrating windshields are merely rhetorical deceits, distractions. If the woman had driven away, if they had any reason to arrest her, they could have gotten a warrant and gone to her home later. She wasn’t actually escaping. It grossly falsifies the situation to pretend that some criminal might have escaped justice. All this really is, a Trump cultist is defending Trump officials defending extralegal murder of citizens. Trump officials want this sort of thing because it covers ICE and others in their campaign of intimidation of the citizens. And Trump officials want to intimidate some citizens, in perceived politically hostile cities, because it is part of the Trump campaign to wreck the last shreds of bourgeois democracy. Trump cultists like this one are with the program, therefore they must lie about a case that for unknown random reasons gets famous. The real problem is systemic, but people are going to criticize that problem with an example, hence the desperate dishonesty of stooges like c1ue.

Also a gross falsification is the claim that police are trained not to provide first aid. There’s even an implication that it is somehow obligated to keep others from providing first aid. That’s why the behavior of the ICE agents showed their intention to kill.

(Escape by the way should not itself be a capital offense, a moral point too obvious for a conservative mind to grasp, but still. Conservatives can’t even grasp the moral in “a life for a life,” not compared to a life for making me the cop nervous.)

And the repeated claims that she was interfering repeatedly and so are still explanations showing the murder was premeditated, taking out an enemy. They’d seen this woman before and they knew she was a “fucking bitch” and they took her out for it.

Posted by: steven t johnson | Jan 11 2026 19:07 utc | 621

Congrats America….
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/AY2ULacS4bk?feature=share
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yOBz2wMicPY&pp=ygUDaWNl
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RhB7g7LU0Wc&pp=ygUDaWNl
This is what you wanted? Well, you got it.
That Constitution and Bill of Rights? Shit stained toilet paper and nothing more.
USA!USA!USA! We’re #1. (In fucking over our citizens and ignoring their rights)
And in general, could not happen to a more deserving group of people. You let you government do it to the world, now it they are doing it TO YOU. Well done.

Again, all those cheering on the ICE for shooting a woman in the face….. when they do it to you, KARMA.

Posted by: ftp | Jan 11 2026 19:33 utc | 622

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/eTEQCLWpJC8
So I guess that woman hit by ICE vehicle should have just opened fire on the Pig carrier?
Certainly had more of a reason than the ICE coward who did.
You ‘Good Americans’ state fellators get what you allow. And I hope you get it good and hard.

Posted by: ftp | Jan 11 2026 19:59 utc | 623

If there was a child in front of this car and the woman did the same thing, she would be just as liable for endangering the child. This line of reasoning is stupid.
Posted by: c1ue | Jan 11 2026 17:57 utc | 620

You may define this line of reasoning as stupid but you do much worse : you blame the woman for her supposedly dangerous actions while you justify the agent’s who were way more dangerous. He shot 3 times at a windshield very close to his partner which caused a driverless car to run at high speed on a crowded street.

that dumb fucking people will insert themselves into dangerous situations without having any idea of the danger they put themselves in.

I don’t know. Maybe it makes her a hero and of you a coward. But you can’t blame her because she stood up for a cause. Maybe you don’t want to change things because you’re fine the way they are. Until when ? Are you the kind to leave your fucking PC screen to take action or the kind to submit ?

Posted by: xiao pignouf | Jan 11 2026 20:06 utc | 624

Sociopaths? Gangsters? Gestapo? SS? Little dicked cowards who were bullied in school? Hurt wittle feewwings?
All of the fucking above.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ZrPaeUVhEQ
You cop-suckers support this?

Posted by: ftp | Jan 11 2026 21:24 utc | 625

@ftp #622
I have no problems with law enforcement of any kind, because I am respectful of them and careful to not do anything that could possibly be construed as an unlawful thread of deadly force.
Only dumbfucks like you, think these occurrences are law enforcement’s fault – when in fact it is the woman who fucked up by the numbers.
And it is largely because dumbfucks like you, don’t understand or respect or act carefully around LE.

Posted by: c1ue | Jan 11 2026 22:23 utc | 626

@Juan Moment #623
Sad, that you cannot actually acknowledge the truth of what I wrote.
Or have any kind of rebuttal other than childish insults – which have zero effect on me.
But that’s how it is with stupid, incompetent dumbfucks like you: don’t know what you are talking about but blindly repeat shit that your idols say.

Posted by: c1ue | Jan 11 2026 22:24 utc | 627

Posted by: c1ue | Jan 11 2026 22:26 utc | 628

Posted by: c1ue | Jan 11 2026 22:23 utc | 629
I have no problems with law enforcement of any kind, because I am respectful of them and careful to not do anything that could possibly be construed as an unlawful thread of deadly force.

Your naivete is charming. You think it is you who controls what happens. Not how it works with sociopaths with guns and de-facto immunity. Plenty of “respectful of them and careful to not do anything….” folk have been shot dead by pigs with ego, rage, alcohol, “respect my authority!” etc. issues. In almost every encounter you see, the pig is escalating the situation, even with compliant slave types such as yourself. It’s what pigs do. Try to dominate because they are scared shitless.
“And it is largely because dumbfucks like you, don’t understand or respect or act carefully around LE”
I see. Clearly you don’t if you typed that. If you are having to “act carefully around LE”, that should be a serious concern to free people.
What a spineless coward you must be. Good slave, have a cookie.

Posted by: ftp | Jan 11 2026 22:43 utc | 629

@ c1ue | Jan 11 2026 17:35 utc | 616

thanks c1ue… just seeing your response now… so as far as you are concerned this accident of the ladies death is a consequence of her actions and there is no accountability on the ice persons role here.. in other words he assessed a threat to his life and shot the lady dead, while saying fucking bitch as well… maybe a taser could have worked just as well?? what do you think? yes, accidents happen, but the onus of responsibility lies in a number of directions.. it is not being addressed, and i doubt it will be addressed by those involved in a tug of war over what they think is the answer here..

Posted by: james | Jan 12 2026 0:07 utc | 630

@ c1ue | Jan 11 2026 17:35 utc | 616

part 2…

at what point do you acknowledge or recognize when you are living in a fascist state? when the autocratic ‘might makes right’ leader of the usa cancels elections?? what has to happen for you to recognize how the usa is going down a very slippery slope here with it’s embrace of an increasingly police type state, which the law and enforcement folks think is what is necessary to ‘make america great again’? at what point do you see how any semblance of justice, let alone compassion is the exact opposite of what your leaders here are pursuing?? i am truly curious.. thanks..

Posted by: james | Jan 12 2026 0:14 utc | 631

@ c1ue 17:26
It was also reported that the ambulance was prevented from stopping close to the crashed vehicle. If this is correct, the chain of events and action following the shooting could be indicative of subsequently formed intent to make an example of the individual who died. These actions may include the way the deceased person’s body was extracted from the vehicle and carried to the ambulance.
It has also been reported that two federal agents issued contradictory instructions to the driver. If this is correct, subsequent public vilification of the deceased as a domestic terrorist, perpetrator of a crime / criminal by senior members of the US federal administration seem to me inappropriate.
If I may digress, I wonder how different the language and the post – incident narratives emanating from those sources might be, were a similar incident with closely parallel circumstances were to occur in a country that was the subject of destabilisation efforts by a US administration.

Posted by: FeJohn | Jan 12 2026 1:12 utc | 632

@ c1ue | Jan 11 2026 17:35 utc | 616

part 3…

i am curious if you think the ice folks need guns, and if so why? would it not have been possible to apprehend the lady later on?

it seems to me immigration has been useful for some as a means of cheap labour… slavery got outlawed, and maybe this was the idea of a substitute, i don’t know… i don’t know what the agenda is on the world stage, but it seems many western countries have huge numbers coming into their countries and are increasingly concerned about it, including here in canada.. that some people in these western countries, like canada or the usa, might be concerned is legitimate… i can think of a number of different ways this issue of illegal immigration could be handled, and i think the way that trump is going about it is very draconian and ‘police state’ type ideology and thinking…

what do you think c1ue?

Posted by: james | Jan 12 2026 1:44 utc | 633

you cannot actually acknowledge the truth of what I wrote. […]

Posted by: c1ue | Jan 11 2026 22:24 utc | 630

I could agree with you, that the German Nazis were Socialists. But then we’d both be wrong.

Next you claim the U.S. Democratic Party is actually democratically minded.

Plus, never mind that in my tale of people with hard-ons for sticking undesirables in concentration camps and defend to the hilt Agents Smith when they fire bullets into protestors’ faces, Nazis are National Zionists, which Donald Adelson-Strumpf, and by extension his supporters, most certainly is.

stupid, incompetent dumbfucks like you

Seems to me, you “don’t know what you are talking about but blindly repeat shit that your idols say.” 😉

Posted by: Juan Moment | Jan 12 2026 8:05 utc | 634

To post 636…

While I agree that Trump’s actions are harsh, they would have not been necessary, or possible, had his predecessor chosen to expand the legal routes to immigration instead of just opening the door and walking away.

Why didn’t ole Joe propose hiring 80 thousand new immigration processors, instead of IRS agents? Then he could have had his “surge to the border” completely legally. And the current ICE actions would have been unnecessary, because the migrants would have been legal.

But, for reasons known only to them, they opted to go this route, and here we are.

Posted by: Bemused Observer | Jan 12 2026 14:22 utc | 635

@ftp #625Thanks for reinforcing how much of a dumbfuck you are.Dumbfucks think that the law of the United States starts and ends with the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Sorry, that ain’t how it works. Nor is this restricted to libtards – there are plenty of fools on the conservative side as well.But your specific stupidity is why you don’t understand what is going on, how things actually work or how they are accomplished or why the shitty outcomes you despise, happen.
Posted by: c1ue | Jan 11 2026 22:26 utc | 631
(this from one who accuses other of childish insults)
???
What is the “supreme law in America”?
c1ue, go back and read your posts. You are a hypocrite. Also, a fool. Clearly too stupid to understand the level of your stupidity.
If you can’t figure out what specifically I am talking about here, and I doubt you are able considering you continue to do so, let me know and I will highlight each and explain it to you.
But you have already established you are a craven cop-sucker, so you will just continue to be the hypocritical fool you have shown yourself to be here. I pity people like you.
As John Wayne is credited with saying, “Life is hard. It is even harder when you are stupid”. Your life must be quite hard.

Posted by: ftp | Jan 12 2026 15:02 utc | 636

@ Bemused Observer | Jan 12 2026 14:22 utc | 638

i don’t live in the usa and follow all this as an outsider… yes, we agree – trumps actions as guided by stephen miller are harsh and might be headed to something much more harsh if the usa people don’t challenge any of it.. read the article in the moa week in review on stephen miller…

Posted by: james | Jan 12 2026 15:49 utc | 637

Every single moron in the Trump regime is a psychopath, drunk on power, which makes us very dangerous at home and abroad
I read that the IDF is embedded with ICE. Given their tactics, I’m assuming that to be accurate
On a more positive note, Trump, if nothing else, is accelerating US collapse

Posted by: Kay | Jan 13 2026 3:55 utc | 638

@ftp #629
No, dumbfuck, I don’t control what happens but I have control over the risk I take on.
Even asshole law enfrocement is constrained by potential blowback: from their own management, from the US legal system from the court of public opinion and from reality.
Only dumbfucks like you, think that they can do whatever they want.
Inserting yourself into a dangerous situation: in this case, law enforcement arresting and deporting a literal felon, increases the range of possible bad outcomes. I have inserted myself into dangerous situations like breaking up fights, but I don’t do dumb shit like obstructing armed police officers.
Then there is what happens once in an elevated risk situation. Knowing elevated risk, I know enough to be careful of what I do, to think about the consequences of my actions and to think about how my actions are perceived by others.
This dumb bitch did none of the above. And you, dumbfuck, probably would not either because “I’m unarmed” or “I’m a civilian” or some other equally idiotic (and frequently wrong) bullshit.
So no, can’t say that I have much concern, at all, about negative consequences from any proximity to law enforcement. And I would note that this includes direct experience in countries where law enforcement is not remotely as well constrained by the aforementioned factors, as the West.
You don’t know shit and don’t know just how stupid you.

Posted by: c1ue | Jan 13 2026 15:10 utc | 639

Preferring Trump at any time to any “blabbering incompetent” is to buy into an obvious con. The blabbering incompetents would always be the better and wiser course than selecting a grifter. Coming from a born/bred New Yorker, your judgement is seriously lacking, and your street smarts are very questionable. Be careful with your decisions in the future and maybe do the opposite of what you think makes sense.

Posted by: inquiringMind | Jan 13 2026 15:12 utc | 640

@james #630
Yes, she was a stupid and entitled bitch – who did not deserve to die but acted in such a way that this is how events played out.
Let’s break this down:
1) She inserted herself into an active law enforcement operation where ICE was arresting, for the purposes of deportation, a multiple felon. This wasn’t a traffic stop, although even traffic stops can be dangerous especially after a cop gets blasted by some scared kid with drugs in his car. LE in such a situation is amped up to start with.
2) Not only was there an LE operation going on concerned a multiple felon, there were also a bunch of people screaming insults at the officers. Do you think this type of environment encourages patience, understanding and reflection? I don’t.
3) She was told to get out of her car. The shout of “drive away” was not from LE, it was from the crowd and possibly from her wife (who was filming). You might note the curious absence of the wife’s filming – no doubt because said film would make it absolutely clear that the wife was the one who advocated an illegal act ie first defying law enforcement order to get out of the car and second, leaving the scene without permission. I would not be surprised that the wife was told by lawyers to not post it – both because it detracts from the narrative but also because it implicates her in her illegal actions.
The law in the US is that once a policeman tells you to get out of the car – not doing so, much less driving away, is basically the same as resisting arrest.
4) I already have covered this repeatedly, but her actions – and more specifically, her lack of consideration for the perception by LE of her actions – is what led to her death.
5) And the cherry on top of this shit cake is the fact that she was there at all. There is overwhelming evidence that these acts of interference with ICE were not spontaneous, but organized by outside entities. And it is these entities who knowingly encouraged this woman to put herself in this situation. She didn’t just happen to drive by and want to help the poor oppressed immigrant.
So once again: where is the actual fault by LE? The only “fault” is that he was not willing to take the chance of being seriously hurt or killed rather than act as his training directs him to do.
And I already addressed the idiocy of the taser: he was in front of the car and a taser won’t do shit through a car windshield.
You just don’t want to admit that this woman fucked up by the numbers.The above is a long chain of events which could have been broken at any link – yet you and the liberal media want to point all the blame as the very last act in this multi-part drama.
Again: she did not deserve to die but she was the one who most directly caused her death.

Posted by: c1ue | Jan 13 2026 15:23 utc | 641

Posted by: c1ue | Jan 13 2026 15:23 utc | 641
fascists gonna fascist. “resist cops, get shot.” as Jerome Powell is learning, no one gets due process.

don’t your knees or back ever give out from being prostrate licking the shit off your master’s boots all the time? cuz obviously your palate is very happy with the taste.

the person ICE was after was a felon. and you know this how? cuz your master said so. end of story.

if the city of Minneapolis did what it should do, en masse drive ICE out of the city, you would be calling for Trump to bomb the city.

cuz law.

Posted by: duck n cover | Jan 13 2026 15:29 utc | 642

@james #631
The US is no more fascist (or less) today than it was last year, or 10 years ago.
But probably more autocratic than 20 years ago.
Sorry dude, but this ain’t Nazi Germany or the worst of purge-era Stalin Soviet Union or East Germany by a long shot.
And I am completely unmoved by your understandable anger over this woman’s death and likely also stemming from Trump’s actions with Venezuela etc. I have experienced, firsthand, the effects of Soros prosecutor inaction and law enforcement “reining in” where I live.
These actions have not mitigated shit in terms of LE abuse, but instead have led to a massive decrease in safety in this city. Stores are literally closing every week. It isn’t just the drug stores – some of that was obvious overbuild even though I now have to take 2 buses to reach the closest CVS.
Even the grocery stores have been closing. There were Safeway grocery stores all over the city I am in – I used to be able to visit any of 5 with a single bus ride. 3 of them have now closed. Both of the remainder are literally like SuperMax cell blocks now – one of the closed ones, was the first to institute glass walls such that you cannot exit, after entering, without a receipt. Those walls have been replicated in the closest one to me now (the other also has this setup), and which has also killed the self-checkout feature which I really like because it allowed me to see exactly what I am being charged.
Nor is this just number and friendliness of drug and grocery stores. The acts of random violence by crazy homeless people are skyrocketing. My wife won’t even walk 3 blocks any more after experiencing 2 such incidents in the span of a week. I myself am a big guy: 6 feet tall, 250 pounds and not all fat so I don’t get bothered much, but I have had to intervene multiple times in the last year to protect women and women with children from aggressive fuckers on the street, in public transit, etc.
And it isn’t just the actual overt acts of violence. Several times now, random people in a low-cost grocery store have escalated to near physical violence at their cashier.
But the good news is that the Burning Man crowd can do whatever the fuck they want: get prescriptions for ketamine to party with at EDM concerts, smoke pot wherever they want (medical marijuana), try to destroy livelihoods with shit AI products that don’t work.
So from my view: this liberal experiment has failed utterly and it is time to get back to a society of law and order and old fashioned productivity from making actual things that people need.

Posted by: c1ue | Jan 13 2026 15:41 utc | 643

@ c1ue | Jan 13 2026 15:23 utc | 641

here is where you and i differ.. i can acknowledge the women fucked up, but you are unable to acknowledge the ice officer fucked up… that is essentially it my friend.. and i will add, you are encouraging an increasingly authoritarian leadership which is headed, if not their already to fascism..

Posted by: james | Jan 13 2026 15:43 utc | 644

For those who are still wasting time with c1ue’s free services as an attorney, remember this person believes that disarming the police unleashes hell on Earth. This is a lie. It’s ideological justification for the notion that anything less than instant obedience is criminal in and of itself and worthy of instant death without any nonsense about judges and juries. This guy doesn’t have any rational reason, he has fear and hate of the masses and the Scourge of God (aka the police) are there to save us from the sinners. That’s why he’s so confident he couldn’t be in her position.

For that matter, this clown pretends to believe that an SUV is a deadly weapon because it is heavy. It can be misused as one, except not in these circumstances. The vehicle has to accelerate. The deadly weapon, the threat, was held in Jonathan Ross’ hand. The weight of the bullet was insignificant compared to the weight of the SUV. In his desperate search for excuses, c1ue doesn’t understand the difference between momentum and mass. Quite a large number of people have been bumped by vehicles in parking lots, very possibly somebody here. My guess is that they didn’t call the police. Now getting bumped by a small car moving at even thirty miles an hour is entirely different, from such a parking lot incident…and from the situation in Minneapolis. Admittedly this perspective suggests that people who sign up to be cops should be brave enough to exercise good judgment.

Stepping back, as a right-winger, the premeditated murder of a lefty is a political plus. That’s why c1ue and others who wish for a brutal government to suppress their perceived enemies are so intent on supporting things like the federal government trying to prevent any state role in the investigation. The political goal of the murder, intimidation of opponents of the government, requires that Jonathan Ross be upheld as a hero, that he not ever be even charged, that the victim must be vilified. If one is shameless enough, even to work out some preposterous argument that its the media’s fault. (Though I think that obscenity came from Gruff.)

Posted by: steven t johnson | Jan 13 2026 15:45 utc | 645

Back to Main

Leave a Comment