Law Enforcement Training Principle Reveals THE TRUTH
Mike Adams argues Alex Predi’s shooting by ICE was an execution, violating core law enforcement principles like accountability for every round fired and proportional force—Predi was unarmed, kneeling, and subdued. He dismisses conservative justifications, comparing their shift on gun rights to a "2A lobotomy," and warns Democrats will weaponize such hypocrisy against future dissent. The episode ties ICE’s paramilitary tactics to surveillance-state risks, urging legal consequences while defending universal Second Amendment rights for all Americans, not just convicted felons. [Automatically generated summary]
Okay, welcome to this analysis of the ICE shooting of Alex Predi in Minneapolis.
I'm Mike Adams.
Thank you for joining me.
I'm already on the record saying that I believe this was an ICE execution of Alex Predi.
However, got a lot of pushback on that from certain quarters and certain people.
It currently seems that about 75% of Trump's support base believes the shooting was justified.
25% believe it was not.
I am in that 25% camp, but I am always willing to listen and learn.
So I've heard lots of arguments from many very competent people.
I'll name some of them here.
And I'm here to tell you that they're all wrong.
And soon you will know exactly why all their arguments are wrong.
Even former law enforcement, their arguments are completely wrong.
So let me explain why.
It's actually very simple.
So number one, you may or may not know my background.
So although I've never been in law enforcement, of course, and I'm not a former military, I'm a very accomplished self-defense firearms practitioner, let's say.
I have gone through thousands of hours of training and range work and practice, thousands of hours.
And I have trained with Navy SEALs.
I've trained with special forces.
I've trained with SWAT.
I've trained with cops.
I've trained with sheriffs.
I've trained with DHS agents.
I mean, not officially, but I mean, they're agents taking gun courses on the side, rifle courses, long-range shooting courses, etc.
I know these guys.
I mean, I know exactly the kind of guys that these guys are, the ICE guys.
I know who they are.
I mean, I can practically tell you their names, you know?
I mean, I don't know those specific people, but I mean, just in general, I know who they are.
And overall, they're not guys that are evil people.
They don't have a bad intent.
But that doesn't mean that this shooting wasn't a bad shooting.
So let me explain something.
In all the thousands of hours of training, and remember, I've done lots of pistol training.
I've done rifle training.
I've done long-range shooting training, et cetera, et cetera.
Shotgun training, not so much on the shotgun side because it's kind of boring, but I've done lots of training.
The number one thing that every instructor tells you is that you are responsible for every round that leaves the barrel of your firearm.
Every instructor says this, and they're right, because guns don't kill people, okay?
Only people pulling the trigger kill people.
So when we are being told right now that out of this shooting in Minneapolis, here's what we're being told by a lot of conservatives right now.
We're being told that, well, an ICE agent took the SIG P320 out of the holster of Alex Predty while he was on the ground kneeling on his knees, having his face smashed in, pistol whipped by another ICE agent.
Okay.
So this one ICE agent took the pistol out, was walking away, and then we're told that there was an accidental discharge of this SIG P320.
And there's some video evidence that where that might actually be the case.
If so, that pistol shot into the pavement because we've all seen the video frames of that, shot into the pavement.
And then we're told that because of that shot, that the other ICE agent that had his pistol pointed at the back of Alex Predty, that he believed that Alex had shot, and thus he opened up and shot Alex multiple times.
Okay?
That's what we're told.
So in essence, we're told that the shooting was caused by the SIG P320 accidentally discharging.
Well, that's a left-wing anti-gun argument that guns kill people, isn't it?
You see what I mean?
That is not a valid argument.
And anyone making that argument just isn't well informed.
That's not a valid argument.
Because that gun, the SIG P320, that didn't strike anybody.
That hit the pavement.
The person who shot Alex Predi was an ICE agent, an ICE agent who heard a gunshot, and then he opened fire on the man in front of him who did not have a gun.
All right?
So those are all facts.
Those are facts.
That is, if you assume that there was an accidental discharge of the P320 that was taken away from Alex Predty a few seconds earlier.
Okay, if you have that assumption, then it is a fact that that ICE agent opened up on Alex Predty right in front of him, even though Alex Predi did not take that shot and did not have a firearm.
Right there.
That's the end of the debate.
It's a bad shooting right there.
Every court of law would hold this up because if you're law enforcement, you can only shoot somebody when there is an imminent threat of serious injury or physical harm to yourself, typically involving an assailant with a weapon.
So if Alex Predty had been trying to thrust a knife at that ICE agent, or if Alex Predi had another gun, which he did not have, and was using that gun to try to shoot the ICE agent, then the ICE agent clearly would have been justified in this shooting.
But none of that occurred.
The ICE agent, we don't know who it is, he shot an unarmed man.
Now, so that completely destroys the argument that, well, the gun went off and that caused the shooting.
No, again, that's a left-wing argument that guns kill people.
All of us in the pro-Second Amendment community, we laugh at those arguments.
Guns don't kill people.
I famously did a video years ago of I had an AR-style weapon.
It was an ACR actually, on the ground waving a magic wand over it saying, you know, shoot, shoot.
And it would never shoot until I pulled the trigger.
I mean, Alex Jones played that video on InfoWars.
That was back in like 2011 or something.
It was funny because we were mocking leftists who say that guns kill people.
Well, now that argument has been taken up by people on the right, that guns kill people.
It's absurd.
So back to principle number one.
And any of you listening, if you are in law enforcement or if you are a veteran or SWAT or whatever, you know you are responsible for every round that leaves the muzzle of your weapon.
You are responsible for it and no one else.
And if that round ends up killing a person, especially an American citizen who's unarmed, you're in trouble because that's a bad shooting.
And you might be criminally prosecuted, civilly prosecutor.
You might be arrested, lose your job, all kinds of horrible things can happen to you.
Every cop knows that.
You're responsible for every round.
All right, the second argument that I hear from people like Jack Poseobic, who is clearly just pushing the deep state narrative on all of this, and he's, you know, a Navy naval intelligence officer tied to the CIA.
Everybody knows that.
Jack Pasobic is saying, well, when you, as a civilian, when you bring a firearm to an area where there are law enforcement, you have a special responsibility in your behavior because you are carrying a firearm.
Well, yeah, but he leaves out the most important part of that.
Law enforcement has the highest responsibility legally in every court of law.
Law enforcement's held to a higher standard of restraint with firearms compared to civilians.
So in other words, self-defense shootings that take place involving a civilian, you know, a non-law enforcement person that shoots somebody in self-defense, they are given more leeway in the courts compared to law enforcement because the courts assume that, number one, law enforcement have had more training than a typical civilian, which is generally true, but not always.
And secondly, that law enforcement is aware of the boundaries of law.
And thirdly, that law enforcement is there to protect the public good, even if it means putting their own lives on the line in defense of someone else.
Whereas on the civilian side, the courts see civilians as rightfully putting their own self-protection as the highest priority because they are not employed by the city or the county or the government.
So there's a very clear distinction here that, and anybody like Jack Pesobic saying that, well, civilians have special responsibilities when they carry firearms.
Yes, that's true.
But you're forgetting the far more important part.
Law enforcement have a much higher standard of special responsibilities when they carry and deploy firearms.
And when law enforcement pulls out a firearm and aims it at a civilian, now they are at an extremely high standard of what they decide to do from that point forward.
And if that law enforcement officer shoots an unarmed civilian who did not pose an imminent threat to their safety, that's a bad shooting.
And that's exactly what happened here.
This is a bad shooting.
And by bad, what I mean is it's an illegitimate shooting.
And at the very least, that officer who carried out that shooting should be investigated, possibly prosecuted, depending on the circumstances.
And by the way, it's not actually an excuse to say, well, he didn't know that Alex Predty was disarmed.
He didn't know that.
He wasn't aware of that.
Because I hear that excuse from a lot of conservative influencers right now that he didn't know.
Well, did he see Alex Predty with a gun in his hand?
No, because there wasn't one.
Did he see Alex Predty with a knife in his hand?
Nope, because there wasn't one.
In other words, the actual shooter, the ICE agent that took the shot, did not have a legal justification to take the shot because he did not observe any imminent threat to his life posed by Alex Predi, who was on the ground on his knees and was being subdued by numerous other ICE agents.
So by any reasonable standard in a court of law, and those of you who are attorneys, you will confirm this, I'm sure, the ICE agent had no legal justification to shoot Alex Predty, even if another round had gone off behind him.
Just because some other firearm went off doesn't give you the right as federal law enforcement to shoot or execute an unarmed American on his knees in front of you.
It doesn't work that way.
So when I hear conservatives out there that are saying this is a justified shooting, I know, number one, they don't have hardly any firearms training.
Number two, they're not aware of the rule of law.
Number three, they don't seem to have any understanding of law enforcement and the special responsibilities that they have.
And then, oh, and by the way, I would remind you, I have been granted concealed carry permits in four U.S. states, you know, in addition to all the thousands of hours of training and practice and range time, et cetera.
Four U.S. states.
And I've passed all the FBI background checks.
I have, you know, not only concealed carry, but I have suppressors.
And I just use that so I don't bother my neighbors when I'm sighting in my rifles on my ranch.
I don't want to wake up everybody from miles around, you know, so I'm polite.
I use suppressors.
So I've passed all the background checks.
And when I took all these concealed carry classes, including in one state was Oregon.
That was a multi-day course, by the way.
When I got concealed carry originally, they were much more comprehensive courses than they are now.
I know now in a lot of conservative states, the concealed carry course is kind of a joke.
You get like four hours of legal instruction and then they make sure you can hit a piece of paper at 10 feet away or something.
Back then, it was much more complex.
It was several days.
As I remember, at least one whole day was dedicated to law.
And primarily, it was dedicated to how you need to keep your ass out of a civil lawsuit by not being a trigger happy civilian who just opens fire on people because you don't like them or something.
You know, it was the emphasis of the course was if you ever shoot anybody in self-defense, you're going to get dragged into court.
You might be criminally prosecuted, depending on the DA.
You're for sure going to be civilly prosecuted by the surviving family members, etc.
So you better not be trigger happy.
You should probably, if you can, you know, leave or something instead of having to shoot someone in self-defense.
But we covered the rule of law.
And in the other courses I've been in, there have been a lot of specific instructions given for law enforcement who were my classmates in some of these courses.
So I'm not saying that I'm an attorney.
I'm not.
And I'm not law enforcement.
But apparently I know the laws of law enforcement's use of force better than most conservatives, clearly, because anybody who thinks this shooting is justified is simply uninformed.
It's clearly not justified.
Resisting Arrest Misconceptions00:06:46
Now, the other thing that I've heard from a lot of people is to say, well, he was impeding traffic or he was interfering in official government business.
And this is coming from conservatives who are MAGA.
And I tweeted out, I said, oh, wait, just wait until the MAGA of January 6th, 2021 hears about what MAGA just said in January of 2026.
Because according to today's MAGA, the MAGA of J6 should have all been shot and killed by federal agents because they were interfering with official government business, weren't they?
They were there to protest the stolen rigged election, which was stolen.
It was rigged.
And they were impeding traffic, weren't they?
Yeah, they were impeding foot traffic or they were impeding vehicle traffic because it was like a million people there.
They were impeding traffic.
So according to today's MAGA standards, all those MAGA people should have been, I guess, just massacred by federal agents, which tells you the double standard that we're dealing with here and how insane the hypocrisy has become.
I've also heard people say things like, well, Alex Predi didn't have his ID on him.
And it's a law that if you conceal carry, you have to have your ID.
So therefore, he was a criminal and a terrorist and he deserved to be shot.
Well, that argument makes no sense whatsoever.
The actual fine for not carrying your ID is like a $25 fine in Minnesota.
Secondly, people like Jack Pesobic himself had previously tweeted out that all gun laws are unconstitutional.
And we all know that the Second Amendment applies to every American in every state in every circumstance.
So those people saying, well, he should have had his ID with him.
What are you?
Are you now pro-police state?
Are you now show me your papers?
Because that's what a lot of conservatives have turned into, basically the Gestapo.
Like, oh, he didn't have his ID.
You know, you have to have your real ID.
We need your paperwork, your documentation.
Do you hear yourself?
You know, five years ago, you were on the other side of this whole thing.
We don't need ID.
We don't need permits.
We're going to march around with guns in our peaceful protests.
We're going to protest illegitimate government.
And there are pictures all over the internet of all kinds of groups of conservatives marching around with 50 cow barrets, which are heavy.
Those are like 30-pound rifles without optics.
I feel sorry for the guy that brought that because marching around with that thing all day, you would get very tired.
I would much rather bring an ultralight AR.
You know, if you're just walking around for show, just bring a super light, like a penciled barrel, you know.
But anyway, the point is that conservatives, they love to march around with AR-15s and long rifles.
They do it all the time.
They've done it for years.
Does anybody remember Bundy Ranch?
Bundy Ranch?
Come on.
All the conservatives, you know, rising up against the federal government's land grab.
Anybody remember that?
Or have we all just forgotten that?
It's bizarre to me that the memory time span of conservatives in America today, the pro-Trump conservatives, seems to be about five minutes.
They have the memory of a goldfish because all of a sudden now it's like, oh, guns are bad and you shouldn't have guns.
And if you have guns and you're anywhere around law enforcement, they have the right to shoot you and kill you, even if you weren't attacking them.
And the other argument is, well, he was resisting arrest.
Now, if you watch the video, first of all, he was, Alex was assaulted by ICE.
He was assaulted by ICE.
They threw him to the ground.
They beat him.
And one ICE agent was pistol whipping him in the face with a pistol.
And that's become clear from another angle now.
So they were smashing him in the face with the butt of a pistol.
Now, if that's happening to you, Are you supposed to just like not squirm?
Are you supposed to do what?
Play dead?
Relax?
Are you supposed to relax?
Or are you going to try to like dodge the blows?
You know, are you going to like put your hand in front of your face maybe to not get your teeth knocked out?
Well, law enforcement calls that resisting arrest.
So as they are beating you and smashing you in the face with the butt of a pistol, if you raise your hand to try to block the pistol, that's called violently resisting arrest.
And that, according to conservatives today, gives them the right to kill you.
That's what Kash Patel says, head of the FBI.
That's what Christy Noam says of Homeland Security.
That's what Trump endorses.
That's what Bondi endorses.
They all endorse it now.
That if an ICE officer or if five ICE officers assault you and start and throw you to the ground and start beating you and smashing you in the face, if you raise a hand to defend your face, you can be shot and killed, and then they will call you a terrorist.
So that's wrong on so many levels.
It's unbelievable that there are any conservatives who could support that.
But they are.
Which, of course, tells you that 75% of MAGA have no principles at all.
They don't believe anything.
They certainly don't believe the things that they stood for, they claim to stand for.
It was all just cosplay for them.
It's sort of like philosophical transgenderism.
I self-identify as someone who defends the Second Amendment, but when it comes down to it, they really don't.
It's like biological men in women's sports.
Same thing.
It's like philosophical Second Amendment people who are faking it, but when you pull up their skirt, they got balls there.
They're actually dudes in women's sports.
Soldiers of Recklessness00:11:44
You see?
Same thing.
So all these arguments that I'm hearing from conservatives so far, none of them hold water in a court of law.
None of them would pass muster in a law enforcement firearms training class.
I guarantee you.
And remember, when I lived in Arizona, I was a board member of the Tucson Police Foundation, by the way.
And I would go there and I would talk to the police chief.
I talked to the captains.
In fact, they invited me to join the police force.
They said, you're the kind of person that we need on the police force here.
Why don't you join?
And of course, I didn't want to be a cop.
It's funny, over all these years, like out of high school, the United States Marines really tried to recruit me because they saw my college entrance test scores and they were like, oh, my God, we need really smart Marines.
What can we offer you?
Can we give you all this?
We'll pay for college.
We'll give you all this money.
We need really high IQ U.S. Marines.
And I'm like, look, that's great, but I'm going to college.
Nothing against the Marines, but I'm just taking another path.
But they tried to recruit me hard.
And then also law enforcement tried to recruit me in Arizona.
But when I was there, I would go to their training facility and participate sometimes in the DT, what's called defensive technique training, DT training.
And that's where I also, ultimately, I became so proficient in edged weapons combat.
because I had taken a lot of training from other edge weapons experts and hand-to-hand combat experts that I ended up training cops on edge weapons defense.
And in some cases, I was training new soldiers who were about to be deployed to the Middle East.
So they would come to the school where I was a student of the school, and this was a martial arts school.
And then I was asked by the school owners to help train these soldiers before they were going to be deployed because they had no training in edge weapons.
So we would train them in edge weapons and try to help them survive when they got deployed overseas.
So I've been around plenty of cops and plenty of soldiers and plenty of SWAT and plenty of special forces, all these guys over and over, year after year after year.
I know exactly how they are trained.
And which means I've also, I know how the instructors work because I've been through many classes of instructors.
And every instructor that I ever attended would be laughing at anybody who claimed that this ICE shooting was a legitimate shooting.
The instructor would probably make you drop down and do 50 push-ups just for suggesting it.
It's like, you freaking idiot, drop to the floor, give me 50.
You know, they would chew you out for suggesting that that's a legitimate shooting.
That is not a legitimate shooting.
Now, I was contacted by Jeffrey Prather, who I respect, by the way.
And let me just mention, Jeffrey Prather has more firearms experience than I do.
Not only is he former DIA and former DEA and an instructor.
I mean, he's taught thousands of people about firearms safety and handling and the rule of law.
And on top of that, Jeffrey Prather, he is, he's a man of high moral integrity.
So if there's one person who I know I can always trust his take on this, it's Jeffrey Prather.
And he says that it's not a bad shooting because the agents there on the ground in the scuffle could not see necessarily that that man's pistol had been taken away.
And that in the moment of the chaos of a scuffle, crazy things can happen.
And they do happen, especially involving firearms.
So he's saying that that's just what happens sometimes.
Basically, I think he's saying that even if it was a mistake, it's the kind of mistake that just happens.
And there's nothing you can do about it.
Now, I don't want to put words in his mouth.
I think that's what he's saying because he and I exchange a lot of messages about this.
Now, again, he's got a lot more experience than I do.
He was a federal agent.
And He's right about the fact that the people right there, the ICE agents right there in that moment, they do not have the same information that you and I have looking at this from seven different angles after the fact, slow motion, frame by frame video.
And I absolutely understand that.
I do understand that.
And I've been one to defend law enforcement in the past when especially Democrats and leftists would accuse law enforcement of shootings or killings or what have you.
I've tended to side with, you know, let's give law enforcement the benefit of the doubt here because they have very difficult jobs and they are under tremendous pressure.
And it's like right at this moment, life or death.
Absolutely.
I understand all of that and I absolutely respect Jeffrey Prather.
However, that does not nullify rule number one, which is that every law enforcement member is responsible for every round that leaves the chamber of every firearm when they pull the trigger.
So you can say, well, they didn't know that the guy was unarmed.
And you could say, well, they heard a gunshot.
They heard that accidental discharge by the ICE agent that we're talking about.
So maybe this guy heard accidental discharge and then he decided to just pull the trigger.
That's his fault.
In my view, clearly that's his fault.
He did not have justification to pull that trigger.
And he's responsible for every round of his firearm.
So I understand that in this fog of confusion, that bad things can happen.
And I've also said to people, I mean, I've literally said that if you go to some protest, well, actually, I've said, number one, don't go to the protest.
Okay.
I've encouraged people to stay home.
But secondly, I said, if you do, don't bring a gun.
I'm not anti-Second Amendment, just to be clear.
You have every right to bring a firearm in a holster concealed, this or that.
But just understand that if you do, that is going to add some level of complication to the situation if there's any kind of a scuffle.
And then the minute some ICE agent sees your holster, they're going to scream, gun, gun, gun.
And then everybody loses their shit.
Okay.
So, and that clearly is some of what led up to this event.
But my point is that these ICE agents, or at least the one that took the shot, I believe that he lacked sufficient training.
And he was in the middle of an adrenaline dump.
And he was trigger happy.
And he shot and killed an unarmed man, whether or not he knew the man was unarmed.
That's what he did.
Now, I'm not saying that their job is easy, but I'm saying that they need better training and they need better restraint.
And I think they're being told to instigate violence.
And they were acting like thugs out there.
They were acting like thugs.
And very unprofessional, masked agents, so they can't be identified.
So nobody's held responsible for when they shoot people.
We still don't know the name of this agent that shot somebody.
So all of that is wrong on so many levels.
Law enforcement are supposed to answer to the public.
They're supposed to wear their name on their badge.
We're supposed to know who they are.
Who are you?
Because you're responsible for what you're doing here.
They're hiding their faces so that no one's held responsible.
And then they're escalating the violence and shooting people.
This isn't the first one.
They shot Renee Good also.
And probably more shootings will occur.
So this is spiraling into a very dangerous situation.
And as I've said before, I think this spiral is all by design.
I think the Trump administration wants leftists to attack and kill ICE agents.
I think actually ICE agents are being put out there as bait because I think Trump wants to invoke the Insurrection Act.
In fact, I'm certain that that's coming.
And that in order to do so, he needs to be able to point to the killing of an ICE agent.
And so I think ICE has been given instructions.
Now, this is just my conjecture.
I don't know for sure that this has happened, but I suspect it.
I think they've been told to go out there and start shoving people and start hurting people and try to provoke a response.
Because, you see, Trump can't deploy U.S. military soldiers to do civil policing operations.
That's clearly unconstitutional, wouldn't be tolerated even by the Supreme Court.
But what Trump is allowed to do is to deploy soldiers to protect ICE agents.
But in order to do that, there would have to be some kind of an assault on ICE agents.
And in order to do that, the people out there in Minneapolis have to be provoked to get that response.
So this is a series of events that I think is all engineered in order to lead us into essentially martial law.
That's clearly the goal.
So I don't believe that these shootings are accidental.
I think they're really part of an overall posture, which is a posture of recklessness and aggression by federal ICE agents who are being incentivized with bonuses, you know, signing bonuses to come join us, you know.
And I think they have a hoorah kind of mentality, you know, go out there and bust some heads.
And, you know, one of them was applauding and clapping after the shooting of Alex Predi.
It's on film.
Why would you be clapping?
Why are you applauding that?
They see it as a victory.
So we now have kind of a rabid, violent mentality here, kind of a gang mentality, not a law enforcement mentality.
And that's my primary concern here, is that they're not acting like law enforcement.
I know law enforcement.
And most of the law enforcement that I know that I've interacted with are very law-abiding people.
Concerns About Law Enforcement00:15:07
They are rule-of-law people.
In fact, some of them annoyingly are by the books people.
You know, if there's not a regulation for it, they won't do it.
Some of them just worship the rules, you know.
But these guys, these ICE guys, there are no rules, seemingly.
They're just out there doing anything they want.
Shoving people around, shoving women, pepper spraying, beating, pistol whipping, spraying people in the face on the ground, kneeing people in the face on the ground, and then shooting people.
They have become a rogue, violent, paramilitary police force that clearly is unconstitutional.
And then finally, making this even worse is when you have the head of the FBI, Kash Patel, who says in an interview on mainstream media, he said, well, you're not allowed to bring a gun to a protest, especially with two or three magazines.
He says that's illegal.
And even the NRA said, what?
What are you talking about?
That's not illegal.
That's called the Second Amendment.
And to see suddenly so many conservatives now saying that, oh, it's illegal to have a gun is very bizarre.
The same conservatives who were pro-gun five seconds ago, and now 75% of them are anti-gun.
And you're hearing left-wing arguments coming out of the mouths of so-called conservatives saying, Well, he had two full magazines.
You know, that's the kind of thing you would hear from Democrats.
Oh my God, he had two full magazines.
Therefore, he intended to massacre federal agents.
No, lots of us carry spare mags all the time.
If you ever find me with less than two full magazines, you caught me off guard.
You know, two full magazines, that's an everyday carry situation, folks.
If you don't have two full magazines, you suck at concealed carry.
Because, you know, magazines jam, guns jam, bullets jam.
You got to have a spare mag.
So there's one mag in your pistol, and then there's a spare mag, at least a spare mag.
And a lot of people carry two spare mags, so that's three full magazines.
Well, according to the head of the FBI, that makes you a terrorist.
And the vast majority of Trump supporters are now agreeing with that, which is so insane that I have to wonder how many of them were vaccine damaged.
You know, how bad was the lobotomy if you now think that carrying spare mags makes you a terrorist and that you should be shot by federal agents because you can still carry a pistol with extra mags?
That is not a crime that has been defended for decades by conservatives and all the gun groups.
And, you know, thank God that the gun owners of America, the GOA, came out and spoke out in favor of concealed carry.
And so did the NRA and other gun groups.
And pro-2A attorneys are speaking out.
And they're pushing back on Trump and Kash Patel, as they should.
And I agree with them.
Where is this attack on the Second Amendment coming from?
On the conservative side, which tells you something very bizarre: that about 75% of conservatives don't actually believe in any conservative principles.
Because the moment that a leftist exercises their Second Amendment rights, then they get attacked and called the terrorists, and they say the government had the right to murder you.
That's conservatives saying that.
The same conservatives who, in many cases, were actually participating in the J6 protests on January 6th of 2021.
Those same people are saying now it's right for federal agents to kill people if they carry a concealed firearm on a public street.
That's bizarre.
That actually speaks about much more than just the rule of law.
That speaks to a brain damage issue, some kind of mass mental illness across the conservative movement.
That maybe they've had a stroke or something and they've lost this whole part of their brain, like the 2A section of the brain has just been, you know, surgically removed or something while they slept.
Like someone shoved a vacuum up their nose and sucked out the 2A lobotomy section.
And now they've suddenly forgot what the Second Amendment is.
That's how crazy it is at this point.
So, of course, I don't buy any of that.
I'm a person of principle, which means I believe that the Bill of Rights applies to, get this, all Americans, all Americans.
I know that sounds radical to think that, my God, the Bill of Rights applies to all Americans, even the Democrats?
Yes, yes, even the Democrats.
I mean, the things that I've seen out of this are so bizarre.
I mean, I saw Zero Hedge did an article that tried to make Alex Pratty look like this horrible bad guy that he was part of a group that would blow whistles.
That's what Zero Hedge said.
They had whistles.
And they would identify where ICE was.
And then they would share ICE location details with each other.
As if, like, is that a crime?
Because I can assure you that on January 6th, I can assure you that all the people there were pointing out, oh, there's law enforcement, there's the feds, there's the instigators.
I mean, even Alex Jones and Owen Schroyer and everybody who was there, they're like, there's the feds over there.
Of course, everybody's pointing out where the feds are.
That's not a crime.
That is not a crime to point out where feds are.
It doesn't make you a terrorist to say, hey, ICE is on the corner of, you know, 4th and Baldwin or whatever.
That doesn't make you a terrorist.
And blowing whistles at ICE doesn't make you a terrorist.
And filming ICE with your mobile phone also doesn't make you a terrorist.
I'm sorry.
Anybody making those arguments is intellectually either lobotomized or dishonest.
Just not very bright.
You know, low IQ people make those arguments, but those arguments don't hold up at all.
So believe me, when the Democrats come back into power, and they will probably very soon now, Democrats are going to take all of this.
Every comment made by all these conservatives, like, you don't have the right to have guns or, you know, law enforcement had the right to shoot you.
Democrats are collecting all these tweets and they're going to play them back right in your face when they get power and they deploy federal officials under their administration to come take your guns.
They're going to use the same arguments that conservatives, that MAGA is making right now.
So MAGA dropped the ball on this one big time.
MAGA just abandoned its principles and this is not going to end well.
So we need to do better than this, folks.
We need to have principles.
We need to understand that law enforcement doesn't have unbounded permission to just open fire on anybody they want.
They're responsible for their actions.
Guns don't kill people by themselves.
People kill people.
In this case, law enforcement killed an unarmed American civilian, a nurse.
And there need to be repercussions for this.
Legally, civilly.
The president needs to denounce this activity by ICE and give them better training to reel them in and tell them, you know, you can't just run out and just wage war on the streets of America and just start shooting Americans.
But the president's not reeling them in, is he?
He's encouraging them.
And that's why this is going to get worse.
So we're in a very dangerous situation right now, but I hope you'll join me in standing up for principles, demanding that we honor and respect both the First Amendment rights and the Second Amendment rights of all Americans, whether they're on the left or the right or politically agnostic or whatever.
Leftists have the right to carry a gun just as much as a conservative, as long as they're not, you know, brandishing it and waving it around at people, which was not happening in this case.
So remember, if you don't believe in principles that universally apply to other people, then you don't believe in principles at all.
They're not principles.
By definition, a principle has to be universal.
Otherwise, it's not a principle.
Now, amazingly, conservative America has forgotten all this.
And that's why conservative America is about to be handed probably a long, many years of election defeats.
Because mainstream America sees how out of control this situation is, and they don't like this.
And finally, one more comment.
I am not opposed to ICE removing violent illegal aliens, especially those involved in robberies and kidnappings and rapings and child trafficking and drug trafficking, etc.
I'm all for that.
They should remove those people from this country.
Remember, I support the rule of law.
Anybody who entered this country illegally should be removed.
And if that takes a police force to remove them, I totally support that.
Even though I also support legal immigration that is done by the books, that's done under the rule of law.
But in the process of removing illegals, you can't run around a city opening fire on Americans and then saying, well, you know, the ends justify the means.
I'm sorry, it doesn't work that way.
In the process of removing illegals, if you think you have to shoot and kill Americans, there's something wrong with your process.
You need to do better.
And that's the issue.
All right, so I'm a principled person.
Whether you agree or disagree with my analysis of the situation, I hope you know that I consistently and unwaveringly operate with principles.
My principles are fixed and they are universal and they are not for sale and they will not be compromised.
I believe every American has a Second Amendment right.
Every American has a First Amendment right, which means every American has the right to be on the street.
I'm not saying impeding traffic or impeding law enforcement, but standing back and filming with a phone and carrying a holstered concealed weapon.
Every American has that right, other than convicted felons, let's say.
Every American has that right.
Anyone arguing against that is un-American, period.
And anyone arguing against that, you should stop following them because they have no principles.
And they are telling you that they have no principles.
They're telling you.
So the silver lining of this whole event, although it's very sad that this American nurse was shot and murdered by ICE officials, but the silver lining is now we get to see who has principles versus who's full of shit this whole time.
And that clarity is rather enlightening, isn't it?
Now you can tell exactly.
And to those people who are out there saying, well, I support ICE, just, you know, just shoot and kill anybody who's got a gun.
Shoot and kill anybody who's filming them.
You know, put them on the list.
Call them terrorism.
Anybody who says that, you know, they should be very careful what they are begging for because the police state will be turned against them next.
You think that this apparatus that's being constructed here with the Palantir database, the surveillance grid, the use of deadly force by government, the masked agents, you think that this is going to be limited to just illegals?
Come on.
That's just the excuse to put the camel's nose under the tent here.
This is all about establishing a surveillance police state system so they can use it against you.
So most of these people who are cheering this on, they're going to be the victims of the very system that they are cheering.
It's only a matter of time.
But they're just too stupid to see it.
So sadly, that's where we are in history right now.
If you don't stand for the liberties of others, then don't be surprised when your liberties are taken away and no one defends yours either.
It's very simple.
So I stand for universal liberty.
And while I recognize that law enforcement must at times defend themselves against violent, imminent aggression or the threat of violence by someone with a gun or a knife that's attacking them, I mean, again, I understand that law enforcement, that there are legitimate uses of firearms in self-defense, but this was not one of those times.
It's very clear.
So thank you for listening.
I'm Mike Adams of naturalnews.com and Brighteon.com.
And you can find my article on this at naturalnews.com.
Thank you for listening.
Take care.
Mike Adams' Liberty Stand00:00:14
Most brown rice on the market contains a surprising amount of arsenic.
The Health Ranger store ensures that all our brown rice products are lab tested for glyphosate, heavy metals, and microbiology.