this post was submitted on 25 Jan 2026
614 points (99.8% liked)

politics

27480 readers
2829 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
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] TheObviousSolution@lemmy.ca 10 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

So basically another illegal act that can be thrown at him only to be ignored: manipulating evidence. Although to be fair, hard to manipulate what is already out there, so I don't think it's likely he will.

[–] ThePantser@sh.itjust.works 174 points 3 days ago (2 children)

The evidence is the 10 videos all showing the same thing. ICE is guilty of murder. The videos are all over the Internet, what could they destroy? Other than the name of the murderer there isn't anymore needed to convict.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 92 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (25 children)

Bullet casings, for one. More than one person shot him.

[–] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

Felony murder rule. If you take part in a felony and someone dies as an outcome, you can be charged with murder.

It's how getaway drivers for gas station robberies get convicted of murder when things go south and their buddy shoots the clerk.

[–] Mirshe@lemmy.world 20 points 3 days ago (1 children)

The firearm they claim to have taken off him. The photo they posted is old and literally off Google Images.

The CNN video shows them disarming him and it not being in the beating area when the murder happens

https://www.cnn.com/2026/01/25/us/video/minneapolis-ice-shooting-alex-pretti-visual-analysis-digvid

That picture might not be that gun, but there is proof they should have a gun in their possession.

load more comments (23 replies)
[–] nova_ad_vitum@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 days ago

Do you know the identity of the shooter? Cause they're not just going to tell you.

[–] Strakh@lemmy.world 44 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Wait... You have to have a court tell the federal government to not destroy/alter/plant evidence?

How.. how is that a thing? Should'nt that just happen normally?

[–] Bakkoda@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Law has never really accounted for bad faith actors from the prosecution side. They most likely won't enforce it either. We're very quickly finding out just how much laws won't help us.

[–] BlameTheAntifa@lemmy.world 17 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Yes.

But there are no consequences so they will ignore the court order and destroy any and all evidence they can, just as they did for Renee Good’s killer, the murderer Jonathan Ross.

[–] fodor@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 day ago

It's not quite that bad. Accessory after the fact for murder can result in the same sentence as the murder itself. So some of these ICE pigs, they could face life in prison if they have destroyed evidence poorly.

Of course it depends on the details.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 80 points 3 days ago (3 children)

Why would they want to destroy evidence?

I thought this was "the most transparent administration in history"?

[–] Doomsider@lemmy.world 35 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Transparent to them means they can be openly racist, sexist, and general xenophobic cunts.

What you are looking for is honest. They are not honest

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 13 points 3 days ago (2 children)

I think they like to gaslight about the "transparent" thing, because according to them, Biden was not transparent because he wasn't doing a presser every five minutes. Donvict doesn't talk to the press to provide info, he does it because he is a narcissist.

[–] luciferofastora@feddit.org 1 points 1 day ago

Gaslighting about transparency is a sour kind of irony

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] monkeyslikebananas2@lemmy.world 19 points 3 days ago

Transparently corrupt.

[–] tempest@lemmy.ca 6 points 3 days ago

Even if they didn't destroy evidence what is going to happen? Congress seems fine with the current set of events.

[–] W3dd1e@lemmy.zip 51 points 3 days ago (1 children)

The fact that this had to be said is ridiculous. America is so fucked.

[–] ameancow@lemmy.world 8 points 2 days ago

The fact that it had to be said, says that it's already been destroyed.

It's all going to get worse before it gets better. This is the cycle of history, we're in the pit of the trough.

[–] fodor@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 day ago

So the interesting thing will be that, look, the feds are going to ignore this. They have and will delete data and burn evidence. There's a name for that crime: accessory after the fact.

On the one hand, of course contempt charges don't matter to feds who don't care. On the other hand, the penalty for accessory to murder can be as long as the penalty for murder itself. So it's possible that a half dozen feds could get locked up for life, depending on who did what and when.

And there is no statute of limitations for any of this. They can never feel like they got away with it.

[–] Bwaz@lemmy.world 40 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Cute that he thinks they'll obey the order.

[–] Drusas@fedia.io 3 points 2 days ago

We don't know that he does.

[–] smeg 56 points 3 days ago

Evidence isn't necessary when the law doesn't matter

[–] Snapz@lemmy.world 36 points 3 days ago (10 children)

Is this not covered by standing law? When it is ever legally allowed to alter or destroy evidence?

Is the distinction more that typically this would be a slap on the wrist for law enforcement, but the TRO makes it explicit that there would be consequences?

[–] Lasherz12@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

It's more that the judge wants the punishment to be greater than the typical punishment for tampering with evidence. When the victim is dead the law tends to give undue credence to the statements of the survivor as there is only 2nd hand testimony provided for the prosecution. We should interpret it as a judge making a stand and vowing harsh penalties and the supreme court/appeals should interpret it as the judge making it much harder to overturn the eventual decision.

[–] Snapz@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

Very clarifying. Thank you

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

But will that stop them? Once properly deleted, the judges words become worthless.

[–] MedicPigBabySaver@lemmy.world 10 points 2 days ago
[–] JohnnyCanuck@lemmy.ca 13 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Why would this have to be specified? Obviously the law doesn't matter.

[–] digitalFatteh@lemmy.ca 22 points 3 days ago (2 children)

I would like to think that Judges, especially those leaning Republican, are starting to think that some people might start thinking they’re complicit. So maybe they want to keep heads on shoulders.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] digitalFatteh@lemmy.ca 10 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Probably waiting on orders and a stipend before they mysteriously change there mind and throw their hands on the air as there was nothing they could do.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 15 points 3 days ago

I mean. That's just ignorant at this point...

Even the judges trump was placing for the federalist society a decade ago are turning on trump, and have been this whole term.

It's not enough, we need more out of court systems. But this is something, and it is real.

Like, shits fucking serious. We need to be honest about what's happening

[–] Adderbox76@lemmy.ca 7 points 3 days ago

They...will...do...it...anyway....

Fuck it's so frustrating watching one side pretend the rule of law still means anything.

load more comments
view more: next ›