this post was submitted on 14 Jan 2026
707 points (99.6% liked)

politics

27262 readers
2944 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! 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.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche said in a statement there was "no basis" for an investigation. The statement comes as new polling shows over half of Americans say the shooting was unjustified.

Justice Department officials said on Jan. 13 there is "no basis" for an investigation into the killing of Renee Nicole Good, the mother of three whose fatal shooting by an immigration enforcement agent sparked protests across the country.

"There is currently no basis for a criminal civil rights investigation," Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche said in a statement referring to Good.

The 37-year-old was fatally shot on Jan. 7 in Minneapolis, Minnesota by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent Jonathan Ross, when she moved her car forward near the ICE agent. Her death has inspired widespread protests against the Trump administration’s militarized use of the Department of Homeland Security.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] NoTagBacks@lemmy.dbzer0.com 31 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Uhhh... uh oh. Considering the immediate and widespread outrage response across the country from this very public murder, this is a boldly stupid move. Resentment and distrust of the US government is already at an all time high, and doubling down on an extrajudicial murder like this is only going to not only grow that resentment, but popularize the idea that if the people want justice, they'll have to do it themselves. This administration has been making some especially stupid moves recently and I don't think the world is prepared for the consequences. Like yeah, sure, the trump admin has always blahblahblah, no shit. I must emphasize that this particular term of the administration hasn't even been this stupid until the last few months. They are very much so overplaying their hand right now and they are absolutely not in a position to handle this level of escalation. I'm pretty sure they both think they have way more control than they actually do and have way too much faith in very inadequate contingencies. They're gonna continue having the appearance of being firmly in control, but at this rate, it's just a matter of time before it blows up in their face and then no one is in control. I can't emphasize enough how unprepared we all are for how quickly that will happen when it does.

[–] 4am@lemmy.zip 26 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Resentment and distrust of the US government is already at an all time high, and doubling down on an extrajudicial murder like this is only going to not only grow that resentment, but popularize the idea that if the people want justice, they'll have to do it themselves.

They don’t give a shit, they want us to try. They’re fucking daring us. Like, actually; literally.

[–] NoTagBacks@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I mean, sure? Probably even? But this really only emphasizes my point that they're straight up stupid and beyond incompetent. Even the Romans, for how brutal they were, understood the importance of civic justice in maintaining the continued rule of the state. If the state no longer maintains it's judiciary responsibility, they've basically abdicated their own legitimacy. You can say that the state isn't abdicating it's legitimacy if it at least is bound by some of it's laws, but if the state picks and chooses, is the state not directly questioning it's own legitimacy? I should point out that it's hyperbolic for me to say that the state not binding itself to any one law abdicates it's legitimacy, but there are certain points of judiciary responsibility that will greatly erode the legitimacy of the state if it doesn't maintain them or at least appear to. A very public murder like this is definitely one of those points. Erosion of state legitimacy brings a fragmentation of those that would maintain it's power, and I really don't think they're considering this factor at all. Those in essential positions within the government will become less inclined to maintain their loyalty to the state and be much more tempted to join those seeking to resist the state's existence. Setting this precedence sets this administration on a trajectory to an untenable position. The waning loyalty and increasing sentiment of resistance isn't something that is generally very visible until it VERY much so is. They seem to think they can keep literally and figuratively shooting at us, but it won't be surprising to those paying attention when more and more of "their own" start shooting back at them.

[–] farting_gorilla@lemmy.world 1 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

How can we win.
"They broke the social contract. So fuck your Target. Fuck your Hall of Fame. As far as I'm concerned they can burn this bitch to the ground.."

  • Kimberly Jones, June 9, 2020