this post was submitted on 24 Jan 2026
1158 points (99.5% liked)

politics

27418 readers
4673 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
 

The footage of the fatal shooting of Alex Jeffrey Pretti, said one journalist, “shows that the final act of his life was trying to help a woman who was being physically assaulted by the masked agents who would then kill him.”

In the original video of the shooting of a man in Minneapolis, identified by the Minneapolis Star Tribune at 37-year-old Alex Jeffrey Pretti, a woman in a pink coat was seen in the background filming the incident with her phone. 

Drop Site News obtained footage that appeared "to come from the direction of the woman in pink filming from the sidewalk" and showed the shooting at a closer distance than the footage taken from inside Glam Doll Donuts. 

In the video, the shooting victim, dressed in a brown coat and pants, is seen filming a federal agent with his phone. He's then seen guiding another person toward the sidewalk as the agent forcefully shoves a third person to the ground.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] nuclear_wizard@startrek.website 13 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

I saw a guy walking around town the other day with a sign that said, "Are we great yet?" and felt like that was a great little slogan that confronts Trump supporters with the fact that all of this was supposedly being done to restore whatever personally idealized version of "great" America once embodied to them. Pretty sure the majority of people who voted for Trump wouldn't even say that using federal agents to murder Americans in the street for exercising their constitutional right to protest is included in their own personal definition of the "greatness" that they feel America needs to get back to.

[–] btsax@reddthat.com 3 points 3 hours ago

It's a good message for the non-insane, but anyone still pro-Trump will just tell themselves that we haven't gotten rid of enough gays/immigrants/trans people yet for the country to be as great as it once was in some imagined past. In that light the sign has an ambiguous interpretation