A number of pro-gun rights Republicans pushed back on the administration’s argument that Alex Pretti was dangerous because he had a gun. Pretti was legally licensed to carry one.
A war of words over deeply held beliefs erupted on the political right in the hours after a federal agent shot and killed Alex Pretti on a Minneapolis street Saturday, pitting top officials in Donald Trump’s administration against Second Amendment defenders in his electoral base.
At the core of the debate is that Pretti — who was permitted to carry a gun in public in Minnesota — had a concealed firearm on his person that eyewitness videos show federal agents apparently discovering and removing during the altercation that led to his death. Videos do not appear to show Pretti holding the weapon during that confrontation.
Kristi Noem sought to justify the killing by asserting at a news conference that Pretti “attacked those officers, had a weapon on him, and multiple dozens of rounds of ammunition, wishing to inflict harm on these officers coming, brandishing like that and impeding their work that they were doing.” No evidence has been provided to back up this account.
Anyone else remember the wild accusations all these years about how tHe LiBrUlS wAnNa TaKe Ur gUnS!
But wait. Anyone noticing how it’s not the “libruls” shitting themselves right now, but the NRA and right-wing 2A groups who want no part of this new narrative?
For anyone paying attention, this was always the right wing plan. Always.
Gun rights were previously restricted during the Reagan administration too. These people are seriously the scum of the earth. They’re just too stupid to be convinced of that, and if it finally got through, it wouldn’t change anything.
Absolutely. I have an overarching theorem about US “Conservative” politicians and donors that I’ve been challenging for decades but remains unchanged.
Tr;dr: the top brass are all fucking grifters.
Their primary strategy is doing whatever is most effective and expedient for increasing their socioeconomic power, even if that directly contradicts their previous and current actions and alleged principles. They’re only ostensibly aligned with conservative values because they’re the best for meeting that goal, especially because true social conservative voters are overall both less educated and intelligent, and therefore less critical.
Since noticing that, their actions are all quite consistent and predictable and the hypocrisy rarely surprises me.