Nice, that’s steakhouse level perfection on the filet.

You are right, here is a slowed down video of the agent grabbing the gun, notice that the second it was taken the second agent decides to shoot. Grey jacket guy looks extremely suspicious running like he did.

I’m no expert and I honestly would like to know, where is he concealing a 9mm with an extra magazine?

I don’t think you’re overreacting given that a white male was just shot, as a protester, in cold blood just minutes ago.

https://redlib.perennialte.ch/r/ACAB/comments/1qlt6vp/another_ice_murder_in_front_of_glam_doll_donuts/

Thanks jordanlund for your voice and for keeping us in the loop. Your updates have been my main line to staying informed and engaged with what’s happening in politics, we are all grateful for the care and grit you bring every time you post and for the best sub on Lemmy. This corner of Lemmy is in my mind the reason I came to this platform, we’re here cheering you on, wishing you the very best in these tough times.

You have a point for sure, although Lemmy’s user base is around 45000 or slightly more vs 500,000,000 to Reddits. That’s like 0.009% of Reddit’s user base.

Maybe try using a redlib instance if you need to check out reddit. Personally, I wouldn’t sign in knowing I’m about to freely train that lifeless humming shell of a parasitic LLM incubator.

Where is this? This looks like police breaking up a local dispute at some summer shwanky party, not so much ICE.

Respect on this… No worries. Will delete.

Nice write-up, grateful for Substack posts in a time where mainstream media needs to be demoted.

Same with me, I was amazed at how the plants and rocks looked so similar to terrestrial features. 🥴- Beautiful PIC by the way.

Credit to Mercado Media. Full video here

So they hired a quasi multifaceted fake multimedia company to concoct this bullshit, Is this even real?

Yeah you’ve got a point.

OK critical thinking, stay sharp people and yes I do reference this author a lot, however, where is the proof?

By Rachel Hurley:

The Soviets called it “dezinformatsiya.” We call it salting. And somebody just salted the shit out of the Epstein discourse.

Here’s how this trick works in spy school.

Take nine true things and one lie. When someone finds the lie, they throw out all ten. Or flip it: take nine lies and one verifiable truth. When someone confirms the truth, they assume the rest must be legit too.

This isn’t conspiracy theory.

The KGB literally had a department for this. A Czech intelligence defector named Ladislav Bittman wrote a whole book about it - said that for any disinfo campaign to work, “every message must at least partially correspond to reality.” You mix the poison with sugar so it goes down smooth. Churchill called it “a bodyguard of lies.”

Now. The Sascha Riley audio tapes.

If you’ve been anywhere near political social media this week, you’ve seen people losing their minds over these recordings. Supposedly a decorated Iraq War vet recounting childhood trafficking connected to Epstein, naming names including Trump, claiming he’s testified to the House Oversight Committee. People are crying. People are demanding investigations. The emotional temperature is through the roof.

One small problem.

Not a single claim has been verified by anyone. Not courts. Not law enforcement. Not the FBI. Not a single mainstream outlet.

The “journalist” who published the audio, Lisa Noelle Voldeng, has no verifiable professional background.

Fact-checkers have flagged mismatched dates, references to military figures who may not exist, and claims so “over the top” they’re raising red flags everywhere. When supporters demand proof, they point to… the audio itself. Which is not how evidence works.

I can t but keep asking - why would someone release so much unverifiable testimony right now?

Think about it. If you wanted to protect Trump from the actual Epstein evidence - the stuff that’s documented - what would you do?

You’d flood the zone with something so sensational it drowns out the receipts. You’d make the claims so extreme they can never be proven. Then when the whole thing collapses - and it will collapse if it’s fabricated - everyone who shared it looks like an idiot. Suddenly all Epstein investigation becomes “that conspiracy theory people fell for.” The real journalism gets buried under the rubble of something designed to blow up.

That’s salting. That’s the technique.

“But Rachel, survivors should be believed.”

Survivors with depositions and court records should absolutely be believed. Virginia Giuffre’s testimony withstood cross-examination. The victims in the Maxwell trial provided evidence that led to conviction. That’s what real survivor testimony looks like when it’s legitimate. It goes through legal process. It gets verified. It holds up.

Audio recordings published by someone with no credentials, containing allegations no outlet will touch, expecting you “just believe” without verification? That’s not survivor testimony. That’s a test of how gullible you are.

The reaction alone is a tell. “I listened and cried.” “I felt physically sick.” “I believe completely.” These are emotional responses, not evidentiary ones. And content that’s optimized for emotional virality rather than accuracy is… well, that’s exactly what disinfo looks like. The KGB would be so proud.

Here’s what I know for sure: the real Epstein evidence doesn’t need help from this story. The real connections are documented. The receipts exist. And anyone trying to get you to share unverifiable claims instead of documented evidence is either not paying attention or doing someone’s work for them.

You want to nail Trump on Epstein? Use the depositions. Use the flight logs. Use his own words on tape. Use the evidence that holds up.

You want to protect Trump on Epstein? Get everyone sharing sensational claims that collapse under scrutiny, then watch the whole discourse get dismissed as hysteria.

Know the difference. Please.

I believe that Sascha Riley believes what he is saying. But that doesn’t make it true.

And not one piece of evidence that he has shared proves a damn thing.

Periodt.

Here’s why the Clintons say they won’t testify.

They just told James Comer to go ahead and hold them in contempt - they’ll wait. Their letter, dated today, is four pages of “we see exactly what you’re doing.” The Clintons point out that Comer subpoenaed eight people in his Epstein investigation, dismissed seven without a word, and has interviewed a grand total of two witnesses. Two.

They’ve got lawyers saying his subpoenas are legally invalid, and they’re calling out the obvious: Comer said nothing when Trump took the exact same position three years ago. The Epstein files only came out because four Republicans broke ranks to force a vote. Comer wasn’t one of them. He won’t subpoena the Attorney General to make DOJ comply with the law Congress passed. But he’s ready to bring the whole chamber to a halt for contempt charges against the Clintons.

The threat is barely veiled.

They’re prepared to take this public, make their case to all 45 committee members, and frame the whole thing as Comer protecting his friends while punishing his enemies. They’re basically saying: if you want to grind Congress to a standstill over us instead of passing laws, that works too - we’ll call it our contribution to slowing down the Republican agenda. The letter ends with the kind of line you write when you want it quoted: “Continue to abet the dismantling of America, and you will learn that it takes more than a wrecking ball to demolish what Americans have built over 250 years.”

• Rachael Hurley -

You are right and I think its more nuanced than this. I originally heard it on a reddit post HERE, I think its more like

An immediate $10,000 signing bonus upon joining.

An additional $10,000 is paid if the application is completed before an early August deadline.

The remaining $30,000 is distributed as $10,000 annually over the subsequent three years.

So I was wrong according to reddit, sadly the specific details are not easy to find without getting in a quagmire of MSM news websites that only give thin overviews.