this post was submitted on 12 Jan 2026

441 points (99.3% liked)

News

34105 readers

3121 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.

2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.

3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.

4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.

5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.

6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.

7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.

8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.

9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.

10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

JonsJava@lemmy.world

gedaliyah@lemmy.world

little_cow@lemmy.world

441

Protesters decrying the killing of Renée Good know what they saw with their own eyes. (www.motherjones.com)

submitted 11 hours ago by HellsBelle@sh.itjust.works to c/news@lemmy.world

25 comments fedilink hide all child comments

In the immediate aftermath of the ICE killing of Renée Good in Minneapolis last week, the Trump administration smeared her as a “domestic terrorist,” claiming that she had weaponized her vehicle. They labeled Good a “violent rioter” and insisted every new video angle proved their version of the truth: Good was a menace and the ICE agent a potential victim. That’s despite video evidence to the contrary, showing Good, by all appearances, trying to leave the scene of the altercation, while ICE agents acted aggressively. Kristi Noem, the Secretary of Homeland Security, spent Sunday doubling down, insisting that Good had supposedly been “breaking the law by impeding and obstructing a law enforcement operation.”

So, on Sunday, I joined the throng in Manhattan for one of many dozens of protests held around the country this past weekend. In the middle of Fifth Avenue, surrounded by raucous, defiant New Yorkers, I asked protesters the simple question: What did you see?

“I mean, it seems like the bottomless, self-radicalizing thing that the government is going through,” said Anne Perryman, 85, a former journalist. “Is there any point when they’re actually at the bottom, and they’re not going to get any worse? I don’t think so.”

“I think there’s a small minority of Americans who are buying that,” said Kobe Amos, a 29-year-old lawyer, describing reactions to the government’s gaslighting. “It’s obviously enough to do a lot of damage. But if you look around, people are angry.”

“I saw an agent that overreacted,” he added, “and did something that was what—I think it’s murder.”

top 25 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] TheReturnOfPEB@reddthat.com 58 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) (2 children)

If some police officer responded to a person with a "I'm not angry at you" and the person responded by calling the police officer a "fucking bitch" and shooting them three times in the face ... that person would straight up get human sacrificed to the death penalty god.

2025:

111 officers killed in duty in 2025.

At least 1,177 people were killed by police in 2025. How many of them 1,177 are now domestic terrorists ?

[–] Ach@lemmy.world 3 points 4 hours ago

"At least 1,177 people were killed by police in 2025. How many of them 1,177 are now domestic terrorists"

This timeline fucking sucks. Now the ghosts are becoming terrorists?

[–] pivot_root@lemmy.world 11 points 8 hours ago

At least 1,177 people were killed by police in 2025. How many of them 1,177 are now domestic terrorists ?

If you ask MAGA, Miller, Trump, or Noem, 1,178 of them.

[–] decapitae@sh.itjust.works 22 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

The past as well as the present, are certainly not a good time to side with the tRump terror regime.

The police are not excused for their contribution to bigotry and hate either.

The "leadership" of whatever this nation has become, need more accountability - including the senators enabling the recent tRump coup

When will there be justice? Certainly not as long as any tRrump terrorist regime spporting conspirator holds ANY office in this nation - as we have seen proof of for the last 13 years

[–] drzoidberg@lemmy.world 14 points 10 hours ago (2 children)

Call the regime what it is. They're fucking Nazis. End of story.

[–] Sonicdemon86@lemmy.world 4 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

At least Nazis in WW2 believed in something. This administration is cruel just to be cruel.

[–] nickhammes@lemmy.world 3 points 3 hours ago

They believed what they did about Jewish people, the queer community, and communists, about as much as modern MAGAs do about the queer community, immigrants, and "Marxists", and for basically the same reasons. The Nazis practiced cruel violence for propaganda purposes too. There are differences to be sure, but I don't think you'll find they're not huge or terribly ideological.

[–] zd9@lemmy.world 4 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

We need to use a new word, because they're proud of being compared to Nazis, and it's lost its effect.

[–] pivot_root@lemmy.world 3 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Call them commies. They hate anything related to socialism, but they're creaming their pants at the idea of the government giving handouts to the people who "deserve" it (a.k.a. themselves) while everyone else lives like peasants during China under Mao.

[–] zd9@lemmy.world 1 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

I mean the thing all of those have in common is garden variety authoritarianism. Whatever the base system technically is doesn't matter, if they're just going to have complete control over everything. It's all authoritarianism.

[–] pivot_root@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

But, as you said, they're proud of being compared to Nazis. Calling them authoritarians would just give them a fuzzy, tickling feeling in their loins—because "authority" and machismo.

If the goal is to describe their own behavior to themselves in a way that they both understand and will blow a gasket over, calling them communists is pretty much a guaranteed way to do it. Most of them don't actually understand what "communism" or "socialism" is beyond conflating them with Russia and China-flavored authoritarianism. Add on to that they grew up being indoctrinated into unquestionably believing that communism is the antithesis of America, democracy, personal freedoms, and all that is good in the world.

They see themselves as the good guys fighting evil. Calling them "commies" is, in their own minds and in a single word, outright saying they are the pure evil they hate. The cognitive dissonance of trying to reconcile that thought for even a moment would be agonizing.

[–] zd9@lemmy.world 7 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Why don't protestors spray ICE with the same pepper spray that they use? That's a genuine question. It's not like that's an attack or anything, and they could easily justify it in court if it was.

[–] pivot_root@lemmy.world 19 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago) (1 children)

It's not like that's an attack or anything

Not that they seem to need court rulings to imprison people these days, but ICE jackboots are still U.S. citizens and federal agents. Someone pepperspraying a federal agent would set themselves up for a number of potential charges related to assault with a weapon and interfering with law enforcement.

Don't forget that with law enforcement officers, it's "rules for thee but not for me." You are held to a higher standard than they are, and they have more rights than you.

[–] zd9@lemmy.world 4 points 8 hours ago (2 children)

If a federal agent is conducting an illegal violent action at you, can you not defend yourself? It's probably smart to study up on specifics for anyone involved in the streets

[–] SpacetimeMachine@lemmy.world 10 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Dude, they just shot a woman in the face 4 times for driving NEAR them with literally no consequences. You think they won't just open fire on a group if one of them gets hit with pepper spray?

[–] zd9@lemmy.world 0 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

I genuinely don't know what they'd do, which is why someone should try it defensively if they're being attacked. It's easy to say that sitting in a chair hundreds of miles away from it, but I think protestors need to try other tactics, because just whistles ain't doin shit.

[–] ChunkMcHorkle@lemmy.world 2 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (1 children)

I genuinely don’t know what they’d do, which is why someone should try it defensively if they’re being attacked.

Someone else should try [violence] defensively if they're being attacked because YOU don't know what they'd do in return? When the whole thing is about trying to manufacture justification for martial law? What the fuck is wrong with you?

If YOU want to go get violent with ICE, no one is stopping you. Stop trying to get others to do it for you.

because just whistles ain’t doin shit.

Then why are the House Republicans crying about it?

[–] zd9@lemmy.world 0 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

lol read my comment again

I said it's easy to say when you're not the one doing it. We, as people against this regime, ought to be trying all kinds of different strategies and observe their reactions to probe for weaknesses. I don't think outright violence on its own will be productive.

[–] ChunkMcHorkle@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 43 minutes ago) (1 children)

Who do you think isn't doing what? You personally are free to try all the strategies you want. Stop trying to get others to do them for you "for science" as you put elsewhere, like this is all just a big fucking joke to you. "lol"

I'd like to remind you that it was NON-VIOLENCE in protests that got the National Guard out of Portland in November. From the first paragraph of the final ruling:

While violent protests did occur in June, they quickly abated due to the efforts of civil law enforcement officers. And since that brief span of a few days in June, the protests outside the Portland ICE facility have been predominately peaceful, with only isolated and sporadic instances of relatively low-level violence, largely between protesters and counter-protesters. When considering these conditions that persisted for months before the President’s federalization of the National Guard, this Court concludes that even giving great deference to the President’s determination, the President did not have a lawful basis to federalize the National Guard under 10 U.S.C. § 12406.

https://www.opb.org/pdf/FINDINGS%20OF%20FACT%20AND%20CONCLUSIONS%20OF%20LAW_1762564569662.pdf

And that's Portland. Today, Minnesota and Illinois filed suit as well, and if the protests remain peaceful, both have every reason to win. Here's today's suit from Minnesota against ICE:

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mnd.230268/gov.uscourts.mnd.230268.1.0.pdf

Here's the Illinois suit:

https://aboutblaw.com/bkDs

You should read them. They're not difficult. And they are how non-violence will win: it's far easier to fight fascists via the still-operational courts now than to try to evict them once martial law is in place.

Non-violent protests work in all kinds of ways, not just toward the regime but in community and network building, resource sharing, immunizing those present against propaganda that says they're alone and media distortions of the protests they personally attend, with all the felt solidarity of walking out with people determined to prove that they all feel the same way.

Violent protests -- or to use the government term for them, riots -- do the opposite. They repulse peace lovers, invite media exaggeration and misrepresentation, are used even years later in propaganda, and above all they are the pretext the government is looking for to institute martial law, by law, across ALL 50 states.

It's not a joke to me. Stop trying to suggest "various strategies" for your personal entertainment that include violence because they provably do not work.

EDITED to add link to Illinois suit

[–] zd9@lemmy.world 1 points 34 minutes ago (1 children)

Regime changes have been more successful with mainly non-violent protests than violent protests in history. The goal should be to remove the current people in power through legal means. I fully understand that.

However, would you call pushing an agent "violence"? Because there has been a ton of that. I'm saying a few pepper sprays here or there when they're genuinely defending a violent aggressor who is illegally attacking them would make those on the ground think twice.

I'm not saying attack anyone. Don't shoot anyone, etc. Also all over social media there are massive astroturfing campaigns from Russian, Chinese, Iranian, hell maybe even American bots/provocateurs to get protesters to start more violence, to cause the US to implode quicker. I understand all of that. You seem to be overly angry at random social media users.

[–] ChunkMcHorkle@lemmy.world 1 points 25 minutes ago* (last edited 24 minutes ago) (1 children)

I'm angry at all the commenters here to suggest that Americans should fight in the streets, for whatever reason. You did that repeatedly and almost as a joke.

I can't speak to allegations of "pushing" one way or another because for all the videos I have seen myself, I have seen exactly zero ICE agents being pushed, and frankly your claim that it's happening seems blatantly unbelievable without some kind of video. If you have it, link it.

But while I'm bringing the receipts, here's the TRO (temporary restraining order) that got the National Guard kicked out of Chicago: after this was filed and the orange pedo lost on appeal, he abandoned his effort to keep the National Guard there:

https://static01.nyt.com/newsgraphics/documenttools/46a35c5459e8b073/66434a34-full.pdf

Again, proof that non-violence is working and the courts are holding. As long as they do, lay off suggestions of non-peaceful resistance.

[–] zd9@lemmy.world 1 points 12 minutes ago

I've seen large groups of people pushing a few agents off from abducting some latinos, and it works. I've seen probably 5 different videos in the last few months of that. It actually works to save people from being disappeared when we have the numbers.

Where is your red line for getting "serious"? When he cancels midterms or otherwise rigs it against any Democrats? What they just ignore the courts (as they've done a bunch of times in other areas).

[–] lapping6596@lemmy.world 6 points 8 hours ago (2 children)

You'll be arrested, and even if you get out I doubt you'll ever feel safe again since the current regime is vindictive.

[–] pivot_root@lemmy.world 6 points 7 hours ago

Or shot.

The past week has shown them that the federal government will defend their claims of "self defence" using flimsy video evidence that shows the contrary. Just imagine how emboldened one of them would be in using disproportionately lethal force against an actual threat instead of a perceived one.

[–] zd9@lemmy.world 0 points 5 hours ago

I'm not planning on doing that anytime soon, but I'd like to see what happens when someone does it in a larger group, for science.