No, Michele, there would be justification for shooting if she was weaponizing her car and his life was in danger. NOT if she was rejecting or not following an order to stop. “Stop” followed by “bang you’re dead” if you don’t stop is the work of Nazis, which Trumpets generally are.
But she did weaponize her car. I saw the impact. It jolted his phone and it was the result of disobedience to authority. She did what her no-authority wielding same-sex partner told her to do.
1 Like
You can keep saying that, Michele. It won’t make it true. She was driving away and this pig murdered her.
1 Like
It’s best to listen to foreigners in this situation. Less bias. I blame Trump mostly.
The officer appears to have been hit by a car. Noemi claims he got 34 stitches and bruises that would be easy to prove. Another video shows ICE agent on the ground. No fan of lesbians. Is shooting dead someone who knocks down a ICE officer justified uhh I think not.
STFU scum.
You can keep denying the truth. Video evidence is proof.
its evidence but not conclusive evidence, different angles makes you see different things happening
the ice agent in question did not get knocked down and managed walking to check on her corpse and walking all the way back just fine (signaling to his partners its over and done while making sure his mask is still in front of his face as he walks back)
agreed, show the medical records of the ice agent that was supposedly hospitalised
That may be true but we’ve seen every angle and still nothing conclusive.
depends who you listen to; within 2 hours your government called it a “justified shooting” and the woman “a domestic terrorist”
1 Like
In fairness, the Left called it murder and the ICE agent a murder but who cares what she was. She’s dead.
1 Like
most likely both their families, thats why a government should just state “its under investigation” and not cause this hateful dividedness
Perhaps we can persuade Somalians to stop defrauding us by asking politely or perhaps they will just magically stop by their own will. Great advice. Perhaps we can ask them to go home and they will leave.
View from a Somalian.
perhaps, or perhaps americans could start acting like humans and stop spreading hate and believing in lies? why not support law and order instead of criminal chaos?
what ever happened to the typical american slogan: “innocent until proven guilty” ?
by far most of the people your ice agents “arrest” have been in the usa and worked there as teachers, farmworkers, doctors, cleaners etc for many years… they have no criminal record and dont even get charged for any crime…
yes some of them are “illegal” but removing those people from your country will be a big loss not a gain to anyone
sure there are always (a minority of) people that try to abuse others and commit crimes, should be easy to prove that in court and then you can justly imprison or kick those out
chatgpt says:
Recent data show that a large majority of people booked into ICE custody lacked a criminal conviction — often 65-74 % in various analyses for parts of 2025.
For example, a leaked internal dataset indicated about 73 % of people booked into ICE custody had no criminal conviction, and nearly half had neither convictions nor pending charges.
2. Only a minority had convictions, and an even smaller share had serious convictions
- Reports showed that only about 5-8 % of people booked had a violent criminal conviction and many convictions that did exist were for nonviolent or minor offenses.
Another analysis found ≈65 % had no convictions at all, and 93 % had no violent convictions.
3. Criminal charges vs. convictions
- Some people in ICE custody might have pending criminal charges (i.e., charged but not convicted). Depending on the dataset, roughly 25 %–30 % had either a conviction or charges at the time of reporting in some periods.
What This Means
- ICE arrests are not the same as criminal prosecution — many people are detained solely for civil immigration violations (e.g., being in the U.S. without authorization), which generally aren’t charged as crimes in federal criminal courts.
1 Like
Which law?
The slogan exists as a slogan.
Ironically, so are many ICE agents.
It would be a gain for Republicans.
the ones in your constitution?
it doesnt have to be
sure in some peoples minds, but not if they do some research and use their brains; those “illegals” that work those jobs pay taxes but cant make use of benefits… so they are more beneficial to your country than most americans
But who is qualified to uphold our constitution?
Can’t make use? They are stealing every benefit they get.
in theory all that live in your country
do they? or is that only in your head? because (with a few exceptions) your laws state they cant:
They’re not eligible mainly because U.S. law explicitly excludes undocumented immigrants from most public benefits. Here’s how that works, step by step, in plain terms.
1. Federal law blocks eligibility
The key law is the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA).
That law says:
- Only U.S. citizens and certain “qualified” legal immigrants can receive most federal public benefits.
- Undocumented immigrants are explicitly excluded unless an exception is written into the law.
So it’s not about discretion or case-by-case decisions — the default rule is no eligibility.
2. Benefits require legal status verification
Most benefit programs require:
- A Social Security number
- Proof of lawful immigration status
- Verification through federal databases (like DHS systems)
If someone cannot prove lawful presence:
- The application is denied automatically
- Agencies are legally barred from approving it
This applies to programs like SNAP, Medicaid (non-emergency), Social Security, unemployment, and housing assistance.
3. Funding rules prohibit use for undocumented immigrants
Federal funds come with conditions:
- States cannot use federal benefit money for undocumented immigrants
- If they do, they risk losing federal funding
That’s why even states that are immigrant-friendly usually create separate, state-only programs when they want to help.
4. Exceptions are carved out intentionally
The few benefits undocumented immigrants can receive exist because lawmakers decided:
- Denying them would cause public harm
Examples:
- Emergency Medicaid → hospitals must treat life-threatening conditions
- K–12 education → Supreme Court ruled children can’t be punished for parents’ status
- Vaccines / disease control → protects the public as a whole
These are public safety or humanitarian exceptions, not welfare access.
5. Paying taxes doesn’t change eligibility
Even though many undocumented immigrants:
- Work
- Pay income, payroll, and sales taxes (often via ITINs)
The law still says:
- Eligibility is based on legal status, not tax contribution
So taxes ≠ benefits eligibility.
6. Citizen children are treated separately
If an undocumented immigrant has a child born in the U.S.:
- The child is a U.S. citizen
- The child can receive benefits
- The parents cannot, even though they live in the same household
This is why benefits may appear to help undocumented families, but legally the recipient is the citizen child, not the parent.
In short
They’re not eligible because:
- Congress wrote the law that way
- Agencies are legally prohibited from approving benefits
- Verification systems enforce the restriction
- Exceptions exist only where denial would harm the public
If that were really possible, the fraud in Minnesota would have ended in 2018, when it was first brought up.
Any other suggestions?