Esteban du Plantier said:

---

RangerRick9211 said:

---

Esteban du Plantier said:

---

Walz, Frey, AOC, the Somali chick all need to explain to simpletons like me how a bullet fired from next to the car goes through this hole and hits the driver in the face.

Curving bullets? Shooter has 8 foot arms? Sniper in the trees?

https://media-cldnry.s-nbcnews.com/image/upload/t_fit-1240w,f_auto,q_auto:best/rockcms/2026-01/260107-3x2-minnesota-shooting-scene-vl-211p-6a7722.jpg

---

It's not rocket science. 3 shots total right?

First bullet was from the front when he as hit by the car; through the glass in your photo and probably missed.

Next two were point blank we she was veering right. The window was down. We see that before the event. She waves her hand and the other Fed tries to unlock her door.

One of those two probably hit her.

---

I guess sarcasm goes over you head.

They're claiming it wasn't justified. But if there's a bullet hole in the windshield, it's because he was in front of the car... So the shooting is justified since he was reasonable in defending himself with the expectation he was going to be run over, or was.

---

You're not making sense, though. Sarcasm or not, that front windshield bullet hole did not hit her face. Unless she leant in towards the officer trying to open her door at, like, a 90 degree angle.

The shots that landed were probably the 2nd or 3rd through the open window.

Yes, he fired when his leg was hit by the SUV. You confused everyone with your "hits the driver in the face" bit. No, that probably wasn't the fatal shot requiring a curved bullet from the other side's theory. It was just the second shot.

Sarcasm sucks, tbh.

As if he could see the direction the wheel are turned.

MemphisAg1 said:

---

GSS said:

---

Arrest her, bankrupt her, give her a record. Death not warranted.

---

Deadly force is absolutely authorized in that situation. No doubt about it.

The sad thing is this woman made a series of bad choices that resulted in her death.

I'm beyond out of cares for people who deliberately confront LEOs in the performance of their duties and then escalate things to the point where split-second decisions involving life-or-death get made. There were so many opportunities for her to avoid the whole situation and escalation. She owns the outcome.

---

Or those who block just regular folks from going about their business.
I have always wondered if I happened to roll up on a mob blocking a street and they start busting my windows etc. I think I would floor hell out of car and not worry about who I hit or if I was not in right or wrong.

If you hate Trump you see a murder.

If you are a white suburban woman, most likely you don't want to seem mean, so you condemn it.

Expect it to be the rallying cry through the mid terms and maybe the 2028 election, because the democrats best hope is to make it socially unacceptable to openly support Rs.

RangerRick9211 said:

---

Esteban du Plantier said:

---

RangerRick9211 said:

---

Esteban du Plantier said:

---

Walz, Frey, AOC, the Somali chick all need to explain to simpletons like me how a bullet fired from next to the car goes through this hole and hits the driver in the face.

Curving bullets? Shooter has 8 foot arms? Sniper in the trees?

https://media-cldnry.s-nbcnews.com/image/upload/t_fit-1240w,f_auto,q_auto:best/rockcms/2026-01/260107-3x2-minnesota-shooting-scene-vl-211p-6a7722.jpg

---

It's not rocket science. 3 shots total right?

First bullet was from the front when he as hit by the car; through the glass in your photo and probably missed.

Next two were point blank we she was veering right. The window was down. We see that before the event. She waves her hand and the other Fed tries to unlock her door.

One of those two probably hit her.

---

I guess sarcasm goes over you head.

They're claiming it wasn't justified. But if there's a bullet hole in the windshield, it's because he was in front of the car... So the shooting is justified since he was reasonable in defending himself with the expectation he was going to be run over, or was.

---

You're not making sense, though. Sarcasm or not, that front windshield bullet hole did not hit her face. Unless she leant in towards the officer trying to open her door at, like, a 90 degree angle.

The shots that landed were probably the 2nd or 3rd through the open window.

Yes, he fired when his leg was hit by the SUV. You confused everyone with your "hits the driver in the face" bit. No, that probably wasn't the fatal shot requiring a curved bullet from the other side's theory. It was just the second shot.

Sarcasm sucks, tbh.

---

Sarcasm is one of the most effective rhetorical devices.

In any case, he was clearly in front of the car when he first fired, irrespective of which bullet killed her.

The left's claim that he wasn't in front of the car cannot be possible with that hole in the windshield.

GSS said:

---

Esteban du Plantier said:

---

I guess sarcasm goes over you head.

They're claiming it wasn't justified. But if there's a bullet hole in the windshield, it's because he was in front of the car... So the shooting is justified since he was reasonable in defending himself with the expectation he was going to be run over, or was.

---

The bullet hole in the windshield was about where your typical TX registration sticker goes...and would NOT require one to be "in front of the car". One video clearly shows the officer bumped by the vehicle, maybe his foot was run over by the left front tire...but the officer was clearly not in front of the vehicle. Then two shots through the open window,
Arrest her, bankrupt her, give her a record. Death not warranted.

---

Here is an example why you are wrong, among others already posted.

Pretty crazy. A snowbank saved an officers life after a female driver rams him with her car. pic.twitter.com/3EaokhPBJ7

— Paul (@WomanDefiner) May 4, 2025

Who?mikejones! said:

---

That was reported by authorities, not 1st hand accounts.

The first hand account comes fro. The homeowner who took the video, who has twice confirmed the dead protest was leading the blocking.

---

...

That's an eye witness statement, dude. I saw the same video.

GSS said:

---

Who?mikejones! said:

---

It was also not the first time the officer had been assaulted by vehicle

---

Then he's a really slow learner....
What academy teaches "stand in front of a vehicle, to stop its progress.."
The officer pulled his gun before the car moved forward, and I'll speculate the driver was focused on the other officer reaching into her vehicle.
THREE shots doesn't fit the scenario/perceived threat.

---

Correct. Why didn't he have more rounds than three in the magazine? He should have emptied his magazine on her.

Maybe I misread the earlier post. The authorities confirmed this lady had been interfering with the ice agents throughout the day up to that point.

The eyewitness that ive seen two interviews with, one on CNN, was a homeowner and thats where the one of the videos comes from. She states the protester was blocking traffic purposely to impeded ice.

It appears to me that the protest have a blocking vehicle that slow the progress of ice, while other get out in front and blow whistles or make other alarm type sounds trying to alert potential targets of ice to their presence. I believe, according to the eyewitness, that's what was going on when this occurred

Who?mikejones! said:

---

Maybe I misread the earlier post. The authorities confirmed this lady had been interfering with the ice agents throughout the day up to that point.

The eyewitness that ive seen two interviews with, one on CNN, was a homeowner and thats where the one of the videos comes from. She states the protester was blocking traffic purposely to impeded ice.

It appears to me that the protest have a blocking vehicle that slow the progress of ice, while other get out in front and blow whistles or make other alarm type sounds trying to alert potential targets of ice to their presence. I believe, according to the eyewitness, that's what was going on when this occurred

---

I think Noem in her presser said the lady had been agitating and interfering with the agents all day

Who?mikejones! said:

---

Maybe I misread the earlier post. The authorities confirmed this lady had been interfering with the ice agents throughout the day up to that point.

The eyewitness that ive seen two interviews with, one on CNN, was a homeowner and thats where the one of the videos comes from. She states the protester was blocking traffic purposely to impeded ice.

It appears to me that the protest have a blocking vehicle that slow the progress of ice, while other get out in front and blow whistles or make other alarm type sounds trying to alert potential targets of ice to their presence. I believe, according to the eyewitness, that's what was going on when this occurred

---

Link? I haven't seen an "authorities confirmed" anywhere.

There was a Twitter interview of a dude explaining that she was the lead car all day doing call-outs for the neighborhood on ICE activity.

100% don't buy that take at face-value. Like any other eye-witness, aka the supposed wife.

Welcome to a link to get up to speed.

I'm not a lawyer, but can it also be a defense for the officer that he was concerned the vehicle might strike other persons? Even though it's apparent he feared for his life (justifiably so), and that is justification for his actions, he also stopped a possible rampage that might've resulted in the injury/death of others..

Little Rock Ag said:

---

I'm not a lawyer, but can it also be a defense for the officer that he was concerned the vehicle might strike other persons? Even though it's apparent he feared for his life (justifiably so), and that is justification for his actions, he also stopped a possible rampage that might've resulted in the injury/death of others..

---

Yes, erratic and poorly controlled driving that had been deliberately obstructing traffic then attempting to flee officers is a threat to the protesting crowd or traffic around

https://x.com/i/broadcasts/1RDxlArmbqmKL

1st minute of presser

Little Rock Ag said:

---

I'm not a lawyer, but can it also be a defense for the officer that he was concerned the vehicle might strike other persons? Even though it's apparent he feared for his life (justifiably so), and that is justification for his actions, he also stopped a possible rampage that might've resulted in the injury/death of others..

---

There was a fellow officer also grabbing her window and could have potentially been dragged or run over. So yes he has to take that officers safety into account as well,

But don't expect the left to understand this.

#BREAKING: Minneapolis cancels school Thursday and Friday due to “safety concerns.”

— Insider Wire (@InsiderWire) January 8, 2026

zoneag said:

---

Today, ICE officers in Minneapolis were conducting targeted operations when rioters began blocking ICE officers and one of these violent rioters weaponized her vehicle, attempting to run over our law enforcement officers in an attempt to kill them—an act of domestic terrorism. https://t.co/504gANBKaC pic.twitter.com/8xMqHF0Ih9

— Morblius (@Morblius) January 7, 2026

You can clearly see the car very nearly taking out an officer

---

Can you though?

Has any dem politician, other than fetterman, come out and todl their people- maybe its best to not interfere with law enforcement operations.

No?

🚨 BREAKING: HUNDREDS of anti-ICE protestors are now blocking roads and terrorizing innocent drivers in Minneapolis

Minneapolis Police are TOTALLY MIA

And it’s only 8pm.

WE NEED THE NATIONAL GUARD! pic.twitter.com/hkjfE18vvT

— Nick Sortor (@nicksortor) January 8, 2026

I never in my life thought that there would be a day that Stephen A Smith would be more than a loud mouth, race baiting, pot stirrer.

The past year, he's been surprising. There have been times where I've absolutely disagreed with him, but at least he used reasoning to form his opinions.

Not just that statement, but a lot of statements that he's made over the past year.

samurai_science said:

---

Rapier108 said:

---

Democrats want this violence, just like they did with St. Floyd of Fentanyl riots.

Democrats will say Trump is causing all the chaos and violence, and then run on being "anti-chaos" like they did in 2020.

---

No one cares, the voters want ICE to keep going, polls prove it.

---

Haven't seen that. Most general polls I've seen have shown ICE to be unpopular

You can clearly see the car hitting an officer