[AnonX93]

Originally Posted by M.F.D.B. ↗

1). yes

2). no

Now will you answer my question with as much honesty?

When people physically block a roadway, and some panicking soccer mom in her SUV punches it and takes off running them over.

1). should they be allowed to unlawfully detain a stranger?

2). do they deserve to die for attempting to?

1) Yes
2) No

[tyroneslothrop]

Originally Posted by chechnya ↗

It usually has to flow through a Biden era activist judge before ultimately overturned by the Supreme Court.

Liberal activist judges want to play the role of president but NAH.

Understand that is the narrative, but even conservative jurists lose their patience with this administration. Did you notice that the judge who complained about the record number of violations of court orders in a month was not appointed by Biden, or Obama, or Clinton? He was appointed by the last Republican president, GWB: ICE has likely violated more court orders in January 2026 than some federal agencies have violated in their entire existence.

[M.F.D.B.]

Originally Posted by AnonX93 ↗

1) Yes
2) No

Interesting, you do realize that when you detain a person, you are making a choice to take away their freedom at that moment, correct? And you are also responsible for anything that happens to said person during such detainment?

[Briarknit]

I do enjoy seeing people post the video of Alex getting into it with ice 11 days before his murder, as if that somehow justifies it. Quite the opposite actually, as that makes his murder premeditated.

[Briarknit]

Originally Posted by chechnya ↗

Just because people have a different opinion than you, doesn't make them a troll. It's rather juvenile just to attack the person than to debate points.

Unfortunately, I don't think this is a productive conversation. I sense uncontrolled hostility towards anyone with a differing view point.

Their point was, I believe, that no rational person would honestly take a stance that supports the extrajudicial execution of American citizens.

Because they murdered him, they can never prove he broke any laws. Legally he is permanently an innocent citizen gunned down by his own government.

If America saw what America was doing to Americans right now they would invade America.

[Briarknit]

It's also a fun little exercise to scroll through all of the police shooting videos here and see that the same people have defended every single one regardless of the context.

It makes you wonder what type of police shooting they wouldn't support. Like if ice just set up a firing squad for fun and gunned down the first person they saw and gave no justification for it, I'm sure those same people here would be foaming at the mouth to provide one.

[WonderMomma]

Originally Posted by chechnya ↗

The Trump administration is using laws already on the books, abiding by crooked, biased courts. That's why I laugh when people call him a dictator, authoritarian. Yeah, a dictator is going to ignore the courts of the land and do whatever they want.. that's not what Donald Trump is doing.

You say he is "abiding by the courts," but that claim falls apart once you look at what judges themselves have put on the record since January 2025. Multiple federal judges have documented missed deadlines, failures to comply with release or bond orders, and conduct serious enough to trigger contempt warnings. That is not media framing or opinion, it is coming straight from the courts.

Calling courts "crooked" or "biased" does not change the legal reality. Court orders are binding unless stayed or overturned on appeal. Compliance is measured by actions, not rhetoric, and when judges across jurisdictions, including Republican appointed judges, are documenting noncompliance, the claim that the administration is fully respecting the courts is being contradicted by the courts themselves.

COURT-DOCUMENTED NONCOMPLIANCE AND JUDICIAL WARNINGS SINCE JANUARY 2025

1. States reported, and a federal judge confirmed, that the Trump administration was not fully following an injunction blocking a broad federal funding freeze days after it was issued.
https://www.reuters.com/legal/us-sta...ze-2025-02-06/

2. A federal judge ruled that the Trump administration violated a temporary restraining order blocking that funding freeze and ordered immediate compliance.
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/tru...ze-2025-02-10/

3. A federal court found the administration missed a court-ordered deadline to release foreign aid funds, with payments completed nearly two weeks late.
https://www.reuters.com/legal/trump-...ts-2025-02-26/

4. Plaintiffs filed sworn court submissions alleging the administration continued enforcing blocked anti-DEI contracting rules despite a court order barring enforcement while litigation proceeds.
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/tru...ay-2025-03-14/

5. A federal judge found probable cause that Trump administration officials disregarded a court order halting deportations of Venezuelan nationals under the Alien Enemies Act, including an order directing deportation flights to be turned around.
https://www.reuters.com/legal/judge-...ns-2025-04-16/

6. The same court later revived contempt proceedings after finding the government failed to demonstrate compliance with that deportation halt.
https://www.reuters.com/legal/govern...ls-2025-11-19/

7. A federal judge in Minnesota documented 96 instances in 74 immigration cases where ICE failed to comply with court orders requiring bond hearings, release, or timely filings, warning that this was likely an undercount.
https://www.reuters.com/legal/govern...ce-2026-01-27/

8. That Minnesota court ordered the Acting ICE Director to personally appear to explain the agency’s repeated noncompliance and warned of contempt sanctions.
https://www.reuters.com/legal/govern...ce-2026-01-27/

9. A federal judge warned that continued failure by ICE to comply with individual release and bond orders could result in agency-level contempt findings if violations persist.
https://www.reuters.com/legal/govern...ce-2026-01-27/

10. A federal judge issued a temporary restraining order blocking a Trump administration immigration enforcement policy targeting lawful refugees, finding likely statutory violations and prohibiting enforcement while litigation proceeds.
https://www.reuters.com/legal/govern...es-2026-01-29/

[moonbastard]

Originally Posted by chechnya ↗

And that's part of the problem. Until you start treating them like the law enforcement they are, you'll have people like Renee Good and Alex Pretti who died for no reason.

But refuse to believe he's anything other than an armed agitator.

My first comment, I think.

Get all the way fucked. Some micro-penICE coward shoved a woman. The gentleman and Real Man defended the woman. They maced him for it. He put up his hand to block the mace.

The pussies got so scared when he raised his arm that three+ people tackled him for trying to defend a woman from multiple armed men acting aggressively towards her with firearms and no discerible identification as MPD, FBI, nothing.

Once he was on the ground, they beat him, removed his legal firearm (with which he trained with some of the veteran friends he made taking care of our nation's servicemembers), pistol whipped him, and murdered him.

The entirety of what is good, brave, and defensible about America SPITS DOWN YOUR BOOT-SUCKING, PEDOPHILE-DEFENDING, VETERAN-HATING THROAT.

Please get Funky Town'd ASAP

[Vedderman]

Originally Posted by WonderMomma ↗

You say he is "abiding by the courts," but that claim falls apart once you look at what judges themselves have put on the record since January 2025. Multiple federal judges have documented missed deadlines, failures to comply with release or bond orders, and conduct serious enough to trigger contempt warnings. That is not media framing or opinion, it is coming straight from the courts.

Calling courts "crooked" or "biased" does not change the legal reality. Court orders are binding unless stayed or overturned on appeal. Compliance is measured by actions, not rhetoric, and when judges across jurisdictions, including Republican appointed judges, are documenting noncompliance, the claim that the administration is fully respecting the courts is being contradicted by the courts themselves.

COURT-DOCUMENTED NONCOMPLIANCE AND JUDICIAL WARNINGS SINCE JANUARY 2025

1. States reported, and a federal judge confirmed, that the Trump administration was not fully following an injunction blocking a broad federal funding freeze days after it was issued.
https://www.reuters.com/legal/us-sta...ze-2025-02-06/

2. A federal judge ruled that the Trump administration violated a temporary restraining order blocking that funding freeze and ordered immediate compliance.
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/tru...ze-2025-02-10/

3. A federal court found the administration missed a court-ordered deadline to release foreign aid funds, with payments completed nearly two weeks late.
https://www.reuters.com/legal/trump-...ts-2025-02-26/

4. Plaintiffs filed sworn court submissions alleging the administration continued enforcing blocked anti-DEI contracting rules despite a court order barring enforcement while litigation proceeds.
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/tru...ay-2025-03-14/

5. A federal judge found probable cause that Trump administration officials disregarded a court order halting deportations of Venezuelan nationals under the Alien Enemies Act, including an order directing deportation flights to be turned around.
https://www.reuters.com/legal/judge-...ns-2025-04-16/

6. The same court later revived contempt proceedings after finding the government failed to demonstrate compliance with that deportation halt.
https://www.reuters.com/legal/govern...ls-2025-11-19/

7. A federal judge in Minnesota documented 96 instances in 74 immigration cases where ICE failed to comply with court orders requiring bond hearings, release, or timely filings, warning that this was likely an undercount.
https://www.reuters.com/legal/govern...ce-2026-01-27/

8. That Minnesota court ordered the Acting ICE Director to personally appear to explain the agency’s repeated noncompliance and warned of contempt sanctions.
https://www.reuters.com/legal/govern...ce-2026-01-27/

9. A federal judge warned that continued failure by ICE to comply with individual release and bond orders could result in agency-level contempt findings if violations persist.
https://www.reuters.com/legal/govern...ce-2026-01-27/

10. A federal judge issued a temporary restraining order blocking a Trump administration immigration enforcement policy targeting lawful refugees, finding likely statutory violations and prohibiting enforcement while litigation proceeds.
https://www.reuters.com/legal/govern...es-2026-01-29/

He absolutely does not care.

tyroneslothrop and I both already presented him an abundance of documented instances of Drumph doing EXACTLY what 'chechnya' swears on a stack of seven thousand bibles that he never did.

When called upon multiple times to explain the evidence piled around him to the contrary, the best and only retort he could muster was 'librul activist judges don't count!'

I believe he is actively trolling at this point. Anyone so insufferably stupid as to earnestly sit there and say that Trump has never defied a court order when presented with mountains of evidence to the contrary would probably have starved himself to death because he couldn't plug in the toaster or gotten his dick caught in a waring blender while trying to make his mommy a a pina colada. He'd certainly be too dumb to figure out how to log in to a website.

I, personally, appreciate your further substantiation of the point that all the rest of us (aside from chechnya and his little upvote-simping buttboy MFDB, who indiscriminately upvotes every single ultra-conservative post made on the site, all day every day) already know to be true.

But you're wasting your time feeding these trolls. They will see and believe what they want to see and believe, not what actually exists. Hell, the entire MAGA ethos and campaign are built on that foundation. You know this.

When I asked him about Trump's DoJ continuing to ignore the legally-ordered release of the Epstein Files, his answer was literally, "But Joe Biden..."

No point arguing with proven trolls. Or even giving them facts with a smile.

[WonderMomma]

I understand, and saw both of your replies. I had to give it a go. I thought I might list specific examples but I forget sometimes that people are set in their ways and beliefs.