Below is my column on Fox.com on Democratic politicians and pundits immediately declaring that the ICE officer in Minneapolis is a murderer. There is a method to this madness for politicians such as Rep. Dan Goldman (D., N.Y.) who are facing primary challenges from the far left. He and others sit like Madam Defarge, simply knitting the names of expendable officers to fuel the mob.
Here is the column:
“It was an outright murder.” Those words from Rep. Dan Goldman (D., N.Y.) were echoed by Democratic leaders from coast to coast almost immediately after an ICE agent shot and killed Renee Nicole Good, 37, as she sped toward him in a vehicle. Goldman is the Madame Defarge of American politics, the character from Tale of Two Cities who knitted as she gleefully called for the heads of aristocrats and counterrevolutionaries in the French Revolution.
Goldman has made a career of dismissing due process for his political opponents while engaging in willful blindness of the conduct of his allies. He has denied the existence of Antifa as an organization as well as claiming that he has seen no evidence of an increase in attacks on ICE officers.
He apparently needed no further proof to declare this officer a murderer: “It was an outright murder. This officer needs to not only be fired and suspended, but—based on the video—charged.”
The video does not support such a claim. Under the governing case law, the officer is allowed to use lethal force when he is facing an imminent threat to his life or the lives of fellow officers or third parties.
In this case, the officer had a fraction of a second to decide whether to fire his weapon after Good sped toward him. Good appears to have been attempting to flee the officers and flight alone is not a justification for the use of lethal force. However, when you speed toward an officer, he may treat the vehicle as a weapon and discharge his weapon in self-defense.
Goldman is fully aware that past case law supports the officer in this case. However, he is also aware that he is facing a Mamdani-supported socialist, Brad Lander, a popular local politician. Goldman is ramping up his rhetoric to appeal to the radical left from promising impeachments to calling for the prosecution of this officer. This officer is no longer a human being, he is a prop to be used for political gain. If he has to go to jail to secure a third term for Goldman, he is viewed as a small price to pay.
Others have joined the murder mantra, including Mamdani, who declared, “This morning, an ICE agent murdered a woman in Minneapolis—only the latest horror in a year full of cruelty.”
Mamdani insisted that he was going to focus on retaining existing NYPD officers rather than adding more officers. That seems unlikely as he shows that officers cannot expect him to support them if they are involved in such shootings. The mayor immediately joined the mob, dismissed the need for an investigation, and declared the officer a murderer.
In an age of rage, the loudest and angriest is king.
That was evident in the profane, unhinged diatribe of Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey who immediately not only declared the officer a murderer but called claims of self-defense “bllsh*t” and told ICE “get the f–k out” of the city.
When many of us denounced his conduct, he mocked his critics by apologizing if his profanity “offended their Disney princess ears.”
Gov. Tim Walz followed suit. As his head of Public Safety insisted that they would not speculate on the outcome of the investigation, Walz stood next to him in declaring that Good was killed for no reason and portrayed ICE as terrorizing the state. Walz previously denounced ICE as “Donald Trump’s modern-day Gestapo is scooping folks up off the streets … being shipped off to foreign torture dungeons.” Ironically, he then added that these people have “no chance to mount a defense.” That concern apparently does not extend for Walz to members of law enforcement.
Goldman, Mamdani, Frey, and others are traffickers in rage, feeding an addiction in the hope that these mobs will propel them further in power. Law enforcement officers are simply expendable when political advantage is at stake.
Democrats showed the same cynical calculation in condemning border agents falsely accused of whipping migrants at the Texas border. Even though videotape refuted the claims, leading Democrats and the media pushed the false claim. The agents were then subject to over a year of abusive treatment before being cleared of the charge.
There is a method to his madness. As Madame Defarge assured her husband, they must ignore the cost to others because “Nothing that we do, is done in vain. I believe, with all my soul, that we shall see triumph.”
Democrats may indeed “see triumph” in rage politics. However, history has shown that today’s revolutionaries often become tomorrow’s reactionaries. Goldman is already facing a challenge from the left that he is not radical enough. Feeding a nation of rage addicts can prove a dangerous business when someone offers purer, cheaper highs.
For now, however, no one will out rage Goldman or others. They remain on a political hair-trigger to find triumph in the tragedies of our times.
Jonathan Turley is a law professor and the author of the forthcoming “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution.”
Abolition probably made plantations less profitable, and less profit equals failure. But if measured in terms of a reduction of scars on a slave’s back, abolition was very successful.
Americans know all too well that these “protestors” are paid performers that wear dozens of hats all in the name of leftist causes.
No smart thinking, loving mother would put her life nor her daughter at risk in associating with these types of dangerous ideological causes. Renee Good was an awful mother for forgetting about her daughter and an evil person for literally trying to run over an ICE Officer. Now she’s dead. That’s on her. Now her daughter is an orphan because her mother’s lesbian “wife” is just as unhinged for associating with these causes.
Shoot them all if they put anyone’s life in danger. Don’t even think twice about it. Kill or be killed.
🇺🇲MagaMom🇺🇲
@Pokemom2R
According to witnesses, Renee Nicole Good was shot for attempting to run over an ICE officer in Minneapolis. She was the ringleader and head driver of the anti-ICE caravan, in a neighborhood she didn’t live in. Her wife was OUTSIDE the car filming the whole thing for social media likes.
Witness: “She was the main car leading the protest… She was very successful in blocking traffic.”
https://x.com/Pokemom2R/status/2009068915935092876
Gunther Eagleman™
@GuntherEagleman
🚨 BREAKING: Secretary Kristi Noem CONFIRMS, the woman in Minneapolis had been STALKING, IMPEDING, and BLOCKING ICE agents with her vehicle for an extended time before the shooting
JUSTIFIED!
https://x.com/GuntherEagleman/status/2009044702432252080
This just in, federal agents fire on Pickett’s Charge. Witnesses say Pickett was just looking for parking. Democrats demand answers. Developing…
His cannons were stuck those darn republicans watered the road.
After being ordered to stop and notified that she had been placed under arrest, pressing her foot on the gas pedal constituted an attack, assault, battery, and attempted murder.
A police officer is not required to be murdered or injured before he responds with a 9mm round compared to a 4,000 lb. vehicle.
Sue for libel and defamation? $$$$$$$
This is a golden opportunity for the Minnesota Attorney General to initiate a landmark U.S. Supreme Court ruling to correct the “Supremacy Clause” of the U.S. Constitution.
The “Supremacy Clause” refers to Article VI of the U.S. Constitution, specifically Section 2 of Article VI.
There is a strong argument that previous U.S. Supreme Courts have been wrong on interpreting the Supremacy Clause. Current precedent doesn’t match the actual letter & spirit of Section 2.
Section 2 very clearly says that “all” government officials (local, state, federal) of all 3 branches of government must follow the U.S. Constitution as the “supreme law of the land”.
The very clear wording of Section 2 in real practice would mean for example:
during the Jim Crow era when some oath-sworn sheriffs were violating their oath of office (not protecting African-Americans). That disloyalty by some local sheriffs justified the federal government (DOJ/FBI) providing checks & balances to protect those people’s rights. Conversely, if the federal officials were disloyal to their oath of office (violating rights) then a local or state official could check & balance those disloyal federal officials.
That is not how the Supremacy Clause has been used in real practice. Most federal officials are good people, but if the federal Attorney General is disloyal to his or her oath of office (refusing to protect citizen rights) there is virtually no rule of law and no check & balance on that lawless official.
The courts interpretation of the “Supremacy Clause” is that the federal executive branch (not the U.S. Constitution) is supreme. When George W. Bush officials violated Ronald Reagan’s torture treaty (also federal law) none of the torture architects were ever held accountable even though 90+% of their targets were totally innocent and got severely harmed. Many of Bush’s torture victims simply wanted an official apology and compensatory damages.
Even today the so-called Christians that served in the Bush Administration haven’t even apologized to the innocent people they destroyed.
Every president since, has expanded the violations on constitutional rights. If you want to stop Trump’s lawlessness you have to fix the foundation created by Bush and correct the flawed interpretation of the “Supremacy Clause” by the courts.
This Minnesota case could possibly correct these incorrect rulings by previous U.S. Supreme Courts.
The argument extends even further back. Secession is neither prohibited nor unconstitutional; under the Tenth Amendment, it falls within the reserved powers of the states. Consequently, every action taken by Lincoln and his successors following the denial of secession rests on an unconstitutional premise and should therefore be nullified, beginning with the damaging Reconstruction Amendments, influenced in part by the ideas of Lincoln’s contemporary, Karl Marx.
BS
Articulate, profound, and unassailable refutation, Einstein, Esq.
All right officer I’m getting out of my car now. End of story.
Instead it was pedal to the metal and the roar of an engine under full throttle with an officer directly in front of her vehicle was her response. A look on her face that said I’ll kill you. You SOB. Lightening quick action was required to stay alive. In the military when I knew that I was in danger I rehearsed both physically and mentally what I would do over and over again. Every soldier with any intelligence did the same. A split second difference and the officer would have been lying in a pool of blood on the frozen asphalt. As a result of this incident the Minneapolis police training manual is being changed to read, if a speeding car or speeding bullet his aimed at you your reaction is to be to just stand there and wait to see what happens. If he would have died the left would have been celebrating his death just like they celebrated the death of Charlie Kirk. Go ahead. Vote them in again if your conscience will allow it.
So true. Alternatively, she arises in the morning endeavoring to be a good citizen, obey the law and not cause any additional trouble, leaving law enforcement to the appropriate authorities.
Someone took the time to slow down one of the key videos right at the center of action. https://twitter.com/i/status/2008966410039644438 , https://twitter.com/i/status/2008976092326203562 Given the treacherous icy road conditions for both cars and people, sudden thrust by the Pilot, and the short time to react by the officer directly in front of the Pilot, it is hard to gainsay the actions of the officer who shot the driver. Furthermore, it is reported that the driver had been known to the officers as one who was attempting to interfere at multiple previous times. We should await the results of the investigation but clearly the city’s policy of studied non-cooperation should cease in order to prevent future such incidences.
A.N.: Just prior to your post, I was about to comment that I would refrain from opining until some household security video comes forward with a different angle (but noting that one resident told media that she had heard the “whistles” telling neighbors that ICE was in the neighborhood, so perhaps we should question whether any ‘exculpatory’ footage defending ICE will be proffered…..)
However, even left-wing CNN reported that Good’s vehicle “was stationary and sideways across the road for about three minutes before the fatal confrontation.”
https://www.cnn.com/2026/01/08/us/video/minnesota-shooting-ice-video-before-shooting-digvid
Arnold.
the MSN has a eyewitness who knows this women, and claimed this isn’t her first time
She is from Colorado and moved to Minneapolis to get in on the action of ICE protesting, according to her instagram page. IOW, she was a paid protestor but now a very dead protestor.
. Waiting for forensics to determine how many shots fired, how many entered vehicle, how many hit driver, what were the angles, and angles of bullet entry into the body, which bullet caused death.
🌲
“THERE NEEDS TO BE BLOOD”
What we’re hearing: The grassroots wants more.
“Some of them have suggested … what we really need to do is be willing to get shot” when visiting ICE facilities or federal agencies, a third House Democrat told Axios.
“Our own base is telling us that what we’re doing is not good enough … [that] there needs to be blood to grab the attention of the press and the public,” the lawmaker said.
A fourth House Democrat said constituents have told them “civility isn’t working” and to prepare for “violence … to fight to protect our democracy.”
– Axios https://www.axios.com/2025/07/07/democrats-trump-resistance-violence-congress
There is no civility from the Democrats – only lies and lawlessness.
So puzzling. The left cheered and celebrated the murder of Ashli Babbitt, unarmed and non-threatening and even praised and promoted the murderer. The hypocrisy is incredible. As for Tim Walz, if he wants to change his identity, evade his culpability and grift, and become the new Jefferson Davis, bring it!
Ashli Babbit was smashing through a door the police had blocked.
Wrong! It was a window and she was not in the building or thru the window when killed. The officer was wrong and the Government paid her heirs for wrongful death.
NOPE. Babbitt had wrongfully entered the Capitol building, and was attempting to wrongfully enter through a side light to the Speaker’s Lobby, despite knowing there was a police officer pointing a gun at her. She had no right to be where she was. Just like Trump wrongfully pardoned those insurrectionists, he commanded that our taxpayer dollars be paid to Babbitt’s family for “wrongful death”. The case would never have stood up at a jury trial. Babbitt died due to her own gullibility in believing Trump’s lies.
Right, Ashli Smashed through that window with her SUV. Mike Byrd was in imminent danger of being run over by a ton and a half of Ashli. So you can of course sympathize with the ice officer who was protecting himself.
Ashli Babbit did not deserve to be shot
Shamone!
This death is on Joe Biden’s shoulders. If not for his insane open borders we wouldn’t need to be rounding up 10 million illegals. Joe Biden did unfathomable damage to the country in only 4 years.
@hullbobby
I can’t disagree, and many of us way back when knew a full amnesty was the goal with all of that that; the bullet we dodged when they shot Trump was actually Kamala and the modern democratic party.
The dems literally do not care who they hurt, and they don’t give a toss about our laws, clearly. They are insane, and that is all. Expect them to only become more so. Much more so. We are pushing back, we knew it would be ugly, and it is; but it had to be done – we could not go down this road any further.
James.
Remember how the left cheered when Prez Trump was shot. Tells you who they really are.
Yes we know how stupid you are.
WW 1 was also Joe Biden’s fault as was the U.S. Civil war and the sacking of Rome.
These Trumpsters are laughable idiots.
And yet, what hullbobby said was quite obviously true. Deflecting with WWI, the Civil War, and the sacking of Rome is lame.
You’re a lying dogface pony soldier.
He was just a lad alive for the civil war and WW1 but Rome, that was their own fault for letting slaves take over their military.
. It began under transforming America ~Obama. Biden ramped up.
So what do they want. Just realize it’s all to destroy the United States. It’s a true overthrow, insurrection. Realize it and in collaboration with foreign governments is treason if a citizen and not if foreign allegiance aka invading army.
Realize it. DJT can send in full military forces to save the Union. Let’s see where Walz Minnesota NG falls in as traitor or patriot.
While firing his gun, and after the car passed him by, the ICE agent did move a single inch. He stood exactly where he shot her.
If he was in harms way the car would have ran him over. He was not in harms way. The driver of the car had turned the steering wheel in a position to avoid both the person and the car blocking the road. MURDER.
“…the car would have ran him over…” MURDER!
And a black female schoolteacher told me one time, “I have went to college.”
I was assured.
trump has taught you well. Take a statement out of context and pretend you are the smartest person on the block.
Question. If trump is so smart, why does he wear a hat saying “Trump was Right About Everything”?
Wait for forensics.
Dear Prof Turley,
No. The woman was not ‘speeding’ toward anyone. In fact, she was clearly, slowly trying to avoid hitting anyone. The woman put no one’s life in danger.
Most likely, she was frightened by a random armed guy storming up telling her to ‘get the fu*k’ out of her car. In fact, I did not hear the guy identify himself as an ICE agent or law enforcement.
I hope her family gets their day in court . .. but I doubt they will.
Domestic law enforcement is a very complicated, challenging, demanding and often dangerous job that requires years of training and experience. ICE agents ain’t FU*KING qualified.
*For the time being, limiting ICE to one bullet per officer would go a long way toward reducing domestic tensions.. .
Her and her wife were following ICE and proceeded to block ICE and were filming ICE and you say she was worried because some unknown masked man was approaching her? Really, you need to do better.
Why was he wearing a mask?
To protect him, don’t be so darn stupid.
Protect him from what?
*F*ck him .. . and the horse he rode in on.
From idiots like you and people like this crazy woman. Anonymity is vital for these brave souls when dealing with criminals.
Given your posts it is understandable that you would want to bugger him and his horse though.
Facial Recognition Doxing
“No. The woman was not ‘speeding’ toward anyone. In fact, she was clearly, slowly trying to avoid hitting anyone.”
Did you watch the video in slow motion ? This was an icy residential street – she pulled out – rapidly – was stoped by police
I beleive there is audio of the police asking her to get out of her vehicle – they were likely arresting her for intefering with ICE – so her actions were resisting arrest. She them Backed at high speed for the circumstances – eitehr striking two officers behind her or nearly doing so
Then threw the care into forward and tried to speed off with the officers hands through her window.
Absolutely I think the Officer should not have shot her. There is nothing he could do by shooting her that would occur quickly enough to prevent harm.
But should not have is not the same as unjustified.
“Most likely, she was frightened by a random armed guy storming up telling her to ‘get the fu*k’ out of her car. In fact, I did not hear the guy identify himself as an ICE agent or law enforcement.”
All false – the video is a tail end of a confrontation – this is an anti-ICE activist – she was following ICE arround and interfering with their operations – she KNEW exactly who they were, She had been interfering and she was being TOLD to get out of the car – because she was about to be arrested. Of course she was “scared” – she knew she was facing arrest.
This was not Random. Further there were atleast 4 ICE agents – with Police accross their vests in the immediate vacinity.
“I hope her family gets their day in court . .. but I doubt they will.”
Of course they will not – while the imminent threat of hram to self and others is only very narrowly met here – she was resisting arrest and fleeing.
Further it is not even clear exactly how she was shot – the Officer had his gun drawn. But his hands were inside her car as she sped away.
The motion of the car with his hands through the window may have been what triggered the shooting and controled the aim.
“Domestic law enforcement is a very complicated, challenging, demanding and often dangerous job that requires years of training and experience. ICE agents ain’t FU*KING qualified.”
Because you say so ? – This was a highly experienced ICE officer.
Most ICE officers come from Other law enforcement.
Frequently these are the people who decided to retire or quit from “defund the police” locations and they look for other jobs where they are actually appreciated.
“*For the time being, limiting ICE to one bullet per officer would go a long way toward reducing domestic tensions.. .”
Please stop the compete and total idiocy.
You do understand that Maduro is facing charges for supplying Machine guns to illegal immigrants in the US.
You are correct – this “is a very complicated, challenging, demanding and often dangerous job”
Officers have no way of knowing if the person they are seeking to arrest will come peacefully or if they will face an ambush with machine guns.
They have already had to deal with snipers.
You want ot fix this – it is trivial. Do not F#$K with law enforcement when they are doing their job.
If you want to protest – go to the Capital in DC – try to get Congress to change immigration law, as the J6ers attempted.
If you want to behave as a citizen journalist – fine – observe and record – but Do not interfere. Stay far enough away that you do not create more problems for law enforcement.
Do NOT make your self part of the problem.
I am sorry about this woman. If further evidence comes to light that makes the officers actions less reasonable – then if appropriate he should be prosecuted. But thus far – while It appears that the Officer may have over reacted, he was acting winthin the legitimate scope of action.
He was certainly far more justified that Officer Byrd was at the Capital.
“ I beleive there is audio of the police asking her to get out of her vehicle – they were likely arresting her for intefering with ICE – so her actions were resisting arrest. She them Backed at high speed for the circumstances – eitehr striking two officers behind her or nearly doing so
Then threw the care into forward and tried to speed off with the officers hands through her window.”
Again, you’re exaggerating the facts to fit a justification for the shooting. She did not accelerate at a high speed. She moved forward as the speed any vehicle would. There were no officers behind her and they were certainly in no danger. She did not try to speed off aggressively. She as scared. She officers aggressively trying to get her out of the car will spook anyone. Saying “get the f@ck out the car is not a declaration of being under arrest. Resisting arrest would not have been charged with that alone.
Each action is going to be scrutinized for specific charges and claims. But, the moment the agent moved away from the front of the car he was no longer in the legal sense in any danger. Shooting her after he moved the driver’s side was unjustified. Having hands inside the door when the agent had plenty of reason not to hang on to the door is no excuse to shoot. Agents are required to exercise every opportunity to avoid danger and harm and in this case they absolutely had it. One chose to go too far out of sheer anger.
“ He was certainly far more justified that Officer Byrd was at the Capital.”
John, that is not even close. Come on. Byrd was justified because he was defending a perimeter that Babbit was in the act of breaching. That is a crime and subject to the use of deadly force while there was rioting all around them.
This agent shot a woman after he got out of the way from any danger and chose to shoot. We don’t even know if this guy was properly trained or even aware of the protocols regarding deadly force. DHS has been hiring highly suspect people who have failed physical and even procedural testing.
“ You do understand that Maduro is facing charges for supplying Machine guns to illegal immigrants in the US.”
Speaking of idiocy…what? You have no evidence of that. Why would he supply them with machine guns when they can procure them here much easier. Maduro cared more about sending drugs to Europe than the U.S.
“ You want ot fix this – it is trivial. Do not F#$K with law enforcement when they are doing their job.”
She was not doing that. She had every right to be there as they were on a public roadway. Kristi Noem is accusing her of being a domestic terrorist and spouting all kinds of nonsense about ICE being stuck in the snow. They were clearly in the middle of the road stopped to get out and try to get her out of her car. When DHS blatantly lying on national TV and agents are being hired with little training and vetting people will not trust these agents to know and act professionally. People can protest these guys all day long while they are doing their jobs. When they can’t handle the pressure and their tactics enrage people. They are not blameless in this whole debacle.
I am not defending the killing of Ashli Babbit at the Capital. Just like I’m not defending the killing of this woman. ..and based on the extensive video evidence I’ve seen so far, why are you defending it John Say?
You say this ICE officer was ‘highly experienced’. Highly experienced at what? .. . I doubt his experience is in domestic law enforcement.
*as I understand it, many of the newly constituted ad hoc ICE gangs roaming American streets have a military background.
. I’m sure there are satellite videos and pics . Every nook and cranny is under surveillance . Wait for forensics.
Yup, a random guy, marked as ICE, climbing out of a vehicle in a convoy of vehicles with flashing lights – just proved by your own words what an idiot you are. Tell you what, stand in the middle of a street and determine who will and will not hit you in 2 seconds (freeway would be best to limit time accordingly).
One would reasonably expect Professor Turley, his blog, its content moderators, and its website administrators to adhere strictly to constitutional principles.
Why, then, does the Turley blog censor speech based on political disagreement?
And it absolutely does?
____________________________
1st Amendment
Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech….
I see many disagreements with Professor Turley among these comments every day – some vehement, not all coherent. How can that be if he’s censoring opposing views?
Evidently, not all posts are censored; the blog’s comments section would be empty, wouldn’t it, Einstein?
Constitutional corruption that is minimized is easier to conceal.
Makes ZERO difference. This his web site. Not the Government.
It makes a difference when one claims to be a constitutional scholar.
STOP being stupid.
Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech…
Mr Turley is NOT government.
It is sickening to me that this happened at all. Both sides are to blame to some extent for the vitriol, however the democratic politicians seem to have the loudest mouths. The agents were there legally enforcing the law whether with the law or not.. The driver apparently was there to monitor, harass or otherwise impede the agents. When I lived in Tahoe there were several incidents where I had to jump out of the way of a vehicle that was approaching from 50′. I do know this that if I was armed and a vehicle was to suddenly drive towards me at a rapid pace, in a short distance, after backing up away from me, I would take that as a threat to me. Do I jump to the right? Do I jump to the left? Or do I just stand there and see what happens? I have not been trained like these officers have but I would shoot to protect myself at the same time as guessing which way to jump. I saw a second by second review of the video that shows he fired after she hit him, although the eyes of the viewer will differ especially based on politics. He was lucky in his shot and she was unlucky.
It never would have happened if she had only stopped and obeyed the officers who were in unmarked cars but with lights flashing. In other words there was no denying, as the politicians are saying, that she did not know who they were and what they were doing. Today’s parents do not teach their kids to obey the laws and the officers. That is the tragedy.
Now I am sure that mr/ms/it anonymous and x and others will jump in and try to discredit me. Their opinions are worthless and are only to fan the flames of divisiveness.
No, both sides aren’t blame worthy. The left clearly breaks the laws of the union. The right clearly upholds the laws or appeased.
Goldman and his fellow cowards like Schumer will be devoured by the hard core leftists regardless of their appeasement Churchill called it feeding the crocodiles. But he does not need to worry as he can easily live off his millions of inheritance. Also is it not ironic that these socialists scum all have degrees from private schools. Not a public university among them Send them all to Gaza
It may turn out that the ICE officer used excessive force. Probably he did. But until it is determined one way or the other, we should not take seriously the outrage of people who have excused the killing of Ashli Babbitt on January 6, 2021.
Based on the video’s the Officer was at the extrme limits of fully justified use of force.
But he was within them.
This woman was interfering with ICE.
They asked her to get out of the car – they were clearly going to arrest her.
Instead she fled.
From what I could see int he various videos she eiterh struck two different officers with her vehicle or came incredibly close.
The officer at he window had his hands in through the window and was injured – though I doubt seriously.
By law that is aggravated assault. I do not agree with the changes to the law that transform simple assault to agrevated assault – but that is the law.
Regardless she was forcefully resisting arrest. Further this was not a traffic stop. She chose to be at this location.
She chose to interfere with ICE.
“ Based on the video’s the Officer was at the extrme limits of fully justified use of force.
But he was within them.“
No, he was not. The agent was standing in front right on the corner of the suv. She moved forward and allegedly got “hit”. We don’t see that. What we do see is he moving to the driver’s side, no longer in any danger or harm or injury, and firing into the open driver’s side.
The moment he moved away from the front of the car he was no longer in danger. He had the obligation to move away from the car not put himself in front of it to justify using force.
“ This woman was interfering with ICE.”
No, she was not. She was waving them to pass as another vehicle did just before the incident. They stopped to apprehend her only after she told them to go ahead of her. When the first agent approached and tried to open the door she moved back and turned the wheel to flee. The agent in front was only standing in the driver’s side corner when she moved forward. That agent moved away from the front, away from danger onto the driver’s side and proceeded to fire into the open window. The justification to use deadly force ended the moment he moved away from the front of the car to the side.
“ The officer at he window had his hands in through the window and was injured – though I doubt seriously.”
That is not what happened. He tried to open the door from the outside when she moved a couple of feet back. When she moved forward the other officer moved to the window and fired point blank.
“ Regardless she was forcefully resisting arrest. Further this was not a traffic stop. She chose to be at this location.
She chose to interfere with ICE.”
She was not under arrest, she was only told to get out of the car. There was never a statement saying she was under arrest. “Get the f@ck out of the car” is not a statement of arrest.
She was in a public roadway and she had every right to be on it. She was waving the ICE truck through and they chose to stop to get her out of the car. She already let another car through. She was not interfering. She was attempting to leave when they boxed her in just like they did with Martinez case. They shot her when she was trying to flee.
Wow, way to spin this. She was there for the purpose of blocking the ICE trucks, that’s why the wife was filming from the sidewalk. She is apparently a paid agitator. What does she do for a living, why was she in that exact spot at that time?
. The shots were through the windshield indicating the location of the officer in a split second decision.
These States have chosen to evade federal law by using sanctuaries. What they cannot do is travel from States using various roads. Interstates are federal and non sanctuary States may have an equal interest in preventing evasion of federal laws. The trafficking might be done on back roads via contiguous States presumably but remains trafficking. DOT
It does lead some to think George Wallace might have declared Alabama a sanctuary State.
. These issues also bleed into the census and the census determines representatives. Voting by illegals isn’t necessary, just a body count. Lawful States have an interest in federal elections.
Lawful States also have an interest in federal money. If Minnesota thinks it can give money within its state to illegals a decision has been made to spend everyone’s money without consent. You’ve stolen money in essence.
43,000 Americans are killed by motorized vehicles annually.
When an officer is threatened with imminent death by motorized vehicle, what, precisely, should his reaction be, Einstein?
Why not? Ashli Babbitt was different. She was already committing a crime during a violent riot. She pushed past a barrier meant to protect congressmen and she got shot.
The MN driver was trying to get away and she was shot in the face by an agent who was no longer in danger the moment he moved to the driver’s side window to shoot her in the face. Fleeing is not a reason to shoot someone when the threat to life is no longer there. They had her license plate number. They could have gotten to her anytime after the had left.
That ICE agent went too far and everyone saw it. Noem lying about it is not helping their case.
Ashli Babbitt was unarmed and must have quite simply been physically restrained by Capitol Police officers.
Ashli Babbitt was a physically inferior unarmed female who was savagely gunned down in an act of murder and homicide by a physically superior male uniformed officer and coward.
So? She was forcing her way onto a restricted area during a riot. She was not obeying officers orders and she got shot. Doesn’t matter whether she was unarmed or not. She had no business tying to breach a security perimeter. She of all people should have known that.
Those charged with protecting a secure perimeter do not care either you are armed or not. They are authorized to use deadly force to ensure there is no breach or danger to the congressmen.
Ashli Babbitt was not armed with a 4,000 lb. Honda with power sufficient to achieve a velocity of 100+ mph.
” Ashli Babbitt was different.”
Yes, Babbitt was clearly not an imminent threat to anyone else.
“She was already committing a crime”
Correct – so was this woman – she was interfering with Law enforcement – the Video we have is of the tail end of this – of her fleeing.
But she was fleeing because she was being arrested.
“during a violent riot.”
Not true and not relevant.
Babbit was attempting to climb through a broken window into an unoccupied space. when Byrd shot her.
He did not announce, he was not visible. and there were people – including other officers behind Babbit that Byrd put at risk.
Good was fleeing arrest. She was surrounded by Officers. She had many reasons to know they were officers.
It is not clear whether she backed into two officers – she certainly came close and she certainly did not care if she did.
She then shifted to forward with an officer beside her and one in front of her car and stepped on it.
She struck the officer beside her – but she could have struck the on in front of her.
The police are NOT obligated to jump out of her way as she is fleeing – she is obligated to not flee and to avoid them.
I beleive that under the circumstances the Officer should not have fired. That he should have let her go and hoped that she did not strike the officer in front of her car. I beleive he should have waited and sent a SWAT team to her house to arrest her later.
But my view that he should have acted differently does not change the legality of his actions.
Do not F$%K arround with police while they are enforcing the law.
If you do not liek the law – go to congress to get it changed.
Do NOT interfere with the police. They did not make the law, they are just there to enforce it.
This incident was entirely predictable. Those interfering with LEO’s have the entirety of the blame.
” She pushed past a barrier meant to protect congressmen and she got shot.”
She climbed through a broken window into an empty room containing only Byrd.
Your beleifs or even the reality of the prior purpose of the barrier does nto create the imminent danger to others needed to judtify lethal force.
Driving a car recklessly while surrounded by LEO’s after being ordered out of the vehicle DOES.
“The MN driver was trying to get away”
Correct – she was resisting arrest – she was ordered out of the vehicle by Law Enforcement.
She was about to be arrested for interfering with ICE.
“she was shot in the face”
Babbit was shot in the neck.
Regardless good was in a moving vehicle – where she was shot was a result of her own actions as much as anything else.
“by an agent who was no longer in danger the moment he moved to the driver’s side window to shoot her in the face.”
He moved the to the drivers side window to force-ably remove her from the vehicle – because she was refusing to leave the vehicle as ordered.
We have been through this many times government is FORCE – When LEO’s act it is FORCE.
If you do not like that – change the law.
“Fleeing is not a reason to shoot someone”
I would tend to agree – but the law is not the same in all states. In my state officers can shoot someone fleeing under many circumstances.
I do not agree with that – but it is the law.
Regardless – she was more than fleeing – she was resisting arrest and she was fleeing recklessly in a 5000lb vehicle on an icy road with Zero regard for the ICE officers that surrounded her – there were atleast 4 officers who she nearly hit with her SUV.
“when the threat to life is no longer there.”
But it was.
” They had her license plate number. They could have gotten to her anytime after the had left.”
I agree, I think that the ICE officer should not have fired. That he should have sent a SWAT team to her house to arrest her later.
But that is a judgement call – my disagreement regarding a split second decision by the officer does not make his actions a crime.
“That ICE agent went too far and everyone saw it.”
Nope
” Noem lying about it is not helping their case.”
Not lying.
This was inevitable given the massive interferance with ICE by left wing nuts.
Either an ICE officer was going to get killed or an activist was.
Lost of ICE officers have been injured.
Regardless, DO NOT F#$K with LEO’s while they are doing their job.
If you do not like the law – go to the capital like J6ers to protest.
If you are acting as a citizen journalist – record what is going on from a distance.
Do not make the job of LEO’s more difficult.
“ Yes, Babbitt was clearly not an imminent threat to anyone else.”
She was breaching a secure perimeter meant to keep congressmen safe. During a riot where officers are being actively assaulted and violence is everywhere they have a duty to protect congressmen from danger. Breaching the barrier after multiple warnings is justified in that situation. Being a veteran herself she should have known better. She got killed because she was being ignorant about her situation.
“ She was already committing a crime”
Correct – so was this woman – she was interfering with Law enforcement – the Video we have is of the tail end of this – of her fleeing.
But she was fleeing because she was being arrested.”
This woman was not interfering. She was literally waving them to pass by. They didn’t like that she would be following them if the went ahead. She was fleeing because she feared for her life. There is no indication that she was being arrested. Legally, they were ordering her out of the car that is not an arrest. They never declared that she was under arrest. That is important because in court she would be justified in leaving the scene if they didn’t claim she was being detained or under arrest. All the said was to get out of the car. It was not even a traffic stop. She did nothing wrong.
“ That ICE agent went too far and everyone saw it.”
Nope
” Noem lying about it is not helping their case.”
Not lying.”
Noem claimed the ICE officers were stuck in the snow trying to move their car. That is nowhere in the video. She also claimed the agent was seriously hurt. Again in the video he’s walking around perfectly fine. She was lying John.
“ Regardless, DO NOT F#$K with LEO’s while they are doing their job.
If you do not like the law – go to the capital like J6ers to protest.”
You mean like go ransack the place and attack LEO’s and engage in rioting? Seems like you are ok with those kinds of “protests”.
Again, she was not doing anything to them. She was literally waving them to get through. THEY chose to get out of their vehicles and escalate the situation. They could have chosen to just drive by like the previous vehicles and gotten on with their jobs. THEY chose to escalate and she was definitely not interfering. You can legally follow ICE in public roads all day long if you want. Following them is not interfering.
John Say,
“ ” She pushed past a barrier meant to protect congressmen and she got shot.”
She climbed through a broken window into an empty room containing only Byrd.”
She climbed past a security perimeter they set up to establish. Last line of defense against a rioting mob. Letting her through was not part of their job. They were in the middle of a threat to all of the congressmen at the time. Rioting and calls to hang Pence and assaulting LEO’s pretty much rules out any kid-glove treatment of anyone breaching a security perimeter established to protect congressmen from rioters intent on harming them. Their job is to keep anyone of those rioters out regardless if they are armed or not.
“ He moved the to the drivers side window to force-ably remove her from the vehicle – because she was refusing to leave the vehicle as ordered.”
Wrong, he already made the decision to shoot her the moment he approached the window. He had his handgun drawn. He committed to the shot the moment he was out of danger and in clear sight of the her. By the time he made it to the driver’s side she was already fleeing. Shooting her was wrong and potentially a crime un MN.
This officer will eventually be identified since there is plenty of video and evidence of who he might be.
george.
Pure bull. Ashli Babbitt all of 100lbs posed zero danger to the much bigger police officer.
She had no weapon.
You claim to be so damn smart. show it.
Dustoff, you clearly don’t understand. It doesn’t matter whether she was 100lbs or 300lbs. She was breaching a security perimeter. Anyone forcing their way in while in the middle of a riot and assaults on police officers would have been shot. It was the last barrier preventing congressmen from being in contact with rioters. She made the stupid decision to ignore commands to stop and as well know when you disobey lawful orders you get shot.
The protection of congressmen and their safety is paramount to those in charge of protecting them and they ARE authorized to use deadly force if necessary to ensure their safety. They don’t care if you are unarmed, or innocent. If you are deliberately attempting to breach a secured perimeter they ARE authorized to shoot you if they seem you a threat. Because it’s their job. Ashli a veteran herself should have been well aware of that simple fact. She chose to hope she would not be shot because she’s unarmed. That was a mistake.
You have no idea what you are talking about. There is no justification at all, ever, for shooting into a group. None. Let me repeat that. None. There was no specific justification for shooting Babbit. She wasn’t breaching any doors or placing any police in danger. Police don’t get to shoot into crowds because they’re scared.
It matters that Capitol Police must have physically restrained her, not shot her.
You’re absolutely right that the shooting of Ashli was different. Good was trying to “get away” all morning long by repeatedly following ice agents around, blocking intersections with her vehicle, and defying orders to leave, and in the end came close to hitting several officers in defiance of lawful orders. In contrast poor Michael Byrd was in imminent danger of seeing a hundred pound woman climb through a window. Totally different.
Then give ICE a promo and medal.
Does a “paid for” Democrat Mob constitute a “militia” ?
“ In this case, the officer had a fraction of a second to decide whether to fire his weapon after Good sped toward him. Good appears to have been attempting to flee the officers and flight alone is not a justification for the use of lethal force. However, when you speed toward an officer, he may treat the vehicle as a weapon and discharge his weapon in self-defense.”
Professor Turley also neglects to mention the officer also had a fraction of a second to get out of the way and move to the open driver’s window to shoot point blank at the driver.
The ICE agent wasn’t in danger. He put himself there and moved to the driver side window when he could have fired straight into the windshield. It’s pretty clear the officer fired into the car while he was not in any danger. He fired after he moved out of the way.
Turley further muddies the waters by injecting nonsensical claims about Goldman and democrats overhyping the shooting while ignoring Kristi Noem outright lying in public about the incident. Even border Czar Homan wouldn’t lend credibility to her claims.
What should be a discussion is the increasing aggression and poor training DHS is giving or allegedly giving these agents. These people are all to happy to engage in violence against civilians knowing they will not be held accountable for their overreaching actions.
I didn’t even see Turley condemning the shooting or the lack of clear reason to do so. That agent was never hurt and he had plenty of time to move to the driver’s side without a struggle and fire onto the woman’s head. There was no justification for that. Not when the agent had options to avoid any harm. DHS has already been caught lying to judges and the public. The last shooting was also unjustified. Remember Martinez? She was also shot several times when DHS lied about the incident. She got acquitted pretty quick after reviewing the video and body cams. ICE has been getting worse about who they recruit and how they train these people. This will only make it easier for Democrats to win seats in the mid-terms.
The Professor laying blame on democrats is utterly despicable, even for the professor.
Watch the entire video george. She pulled in front of the ICE truck to block them, the officer got out to arrest her (yes you can hear him) She made the error of driving away when the office was opening the door.
No, that is not what happened. She was getting out of the way and she was waving them to get ahead of her. She was not blocking them. Another car went past her and she was letting the ICE truck get past her. They stopped and got out. One went to the door and another went to the front corner of the truck. While they were trying to open her door she backs up a few feet turns the wheel to get away and starts moving away. The agent in front put his hand on the hood momentarily while she was moving forward and then moves AWAY from the front and gets on the driver side to shoot her.
The moment he got out of the way he was no longer in danger. He proceeded to approach the driver’s side to shoot her in the head AFTER no longer being in danger. That is where he did wrong.
Moving the car while trying to open the door completely avoidable. Both agents had plenty of opportunity to avoid any threat to life. She did not.
The moment the agent moved to the driver’s side widow he no longer had justification to use deadly force.
Telling her to get out was not sayin. She was under arrest. “Get the f*ck out of the car” is not an arrest. In any court of law words and details matter. Assumptions are not facts.
The agent will likely get away with murder because Trump’s DOJ will find the agent did nothing wrong despite the whole world seeing he did indeed murder an innocent civilian.
She had zero legal business being in that situation; she was there to obstruct justice, a criminal act.
She had every right to be there. She as on a public road. She was there to observe. They chose to stop and escalate the situation and that is what they ended up with.
It is dubious that any individual would ever have a “right” to violate the law.
Not violate the law. She had a right to be on a pubic road like everyone else. She was not interfering. She was observing and it’s perfectly legal to do so. They didn’t like being followed and that is not a crime.
X georgie wins the award for dumbest comment today!!!
WRONG again. She pulled in front of the ICE truck to “block” them.
That’s why the officers were going to arrest her.
You must have been seeing in with MAGA-vision because she was clearly trying to wave them through. They didn’t like that. So they chose to escalate the situation and give them a reason to arrest her.
They had plenty of room to get out like the previous car did. THEY chose to get out and make things worse. She did absolutely nothing wrong. They never said she was being arrested or that she was under arrest. Saying “get of of the f@king car” is not a declaration of arrest.
george
that is not what happened.
Bull watching CNN again? They have the entire video in slow speed. All can be seen.
“No, that is not what happened.”
It is
” She was getting out of the way and she was waving them to get ahead of her.”
False and not her choice.
“She was not blocking them. ”
She was – worse the road was icy – there was no room.
“Another car went past her”
When she was parked.
“and she was letting the ICE truck get past her.”
False and not relevant.
“One went to the door and another went to the front corner of the truck.”
And two to the back – she nearly ran ove those backing recklessly.
” While they were trying to open her door she backs up a few feet turns the wheel to get away and starts moving away.”
Missing LOTS of facts – like the 4 officers she stuck or nearly struck.
Absolutely they surrounded her vehicle and ORDERED her out of the car.
SCOTUS has already ruled that the police can order you out of a vehicle and you MUST obey.
Generally you MUST obey the directions of police officers.
She did not.
“The agent in front put his hand on the hood momentarily while she was moving forward and then moves AWAY from the front and gets on the driver side to shoot her.”
Innaccurate – but not relevant.
She was ORDERED out of the vehicle. Almost certainly she was about to be arrested for interfering with ICE.
But the part that matters is she was ORDERED out of the vehicle and instead of complying which she was required to do,
she tried to flee RECKLESSLY endanging everyone arround her
Presumably you have a drivers license – then you KNOW that it is not everyone else’s job to avoid YOU,
it is YOU job not to hit others.
If they have to move out of your way – you are a threat to their life and limb.
“The moment he got out of the way he was no longer in danger. ”
The moment Good decided not to get out of the car and to flee on an icy street surrounded by ICE officers and other vehcilces.
EVERYONE was in danger.
“Moving the car while trying to open the door completely avoidable. Both agents had plenty of opportunity to avoid any threat to life. She did not.”
Not true, not relevant and not the standard.
First – ignoring the law enforcement aspects of this – when you are driving a car YOU are obligated to avoing harming others.
You may not force them to move out of your way to be safe.
You also may not require them to stay put to be safe.
“The moment the agent moved to the driver’s side widow he no longer had justification to use deadly force.”
The moment that Good refused to follow the order to get out of the car and started moving the car while numerous other people were arround her – she was a threat to others.
“Telling her to get out was not sayin. She was under arrest. “Get the f*ck out of the car” is not an arrest.”
Correct, also not relevant – SCOTUS has already addressed this – she was NOT “free to go”
She was OBLIGATED to obey the order of the officer.
There are things before this incident that we have not seen. It is near certain she was about to be arrested for interfering with ICE.
But it is not important whether that information was conveyed to Good.
She WAS ordered to get out of the car.
Instead she hit or nearly hit several police officers.
She was a threat to life and limb.
This is not a close call.
If you do not like the law – change it.
” In any court of law words and details matter.”
The words of the law matter greatly.
In truth here the words of the LEO do not.
What is important is that Good was NOT “Free to go”
That is true if the LEO said ANYTHING – except “your free to go”.
” Assumptions are not facts.”
Correct,
The FACTS
Good was in a 5000lb SUV – that is a “deadly weapon” according to the law.
She was NOT “Free to go”
She was surrounded by LEO’s and other vehicles on an icy street.
She failed to obey a lawful order to get out of the car.
She was driving recklessly and forced other to get out of her way.
That is more than sufficient for “a threat to the life or others”
“The agent will likely get away with murder”
Nope.
“because Trump’s DOJ will find the agent did nothing wrong”
Because he did not.
“despite the whole world seeing he did indeed murder an innocent civilian.”
Anyone who beleives that is engaged in self deception.
It was a clean shoot…the activist woman was begging to get shot.
She left her home that day with the clear intent to violate the law.
She was a mother.
Your callous comment makes me wonder about your humanity. Is there a human in your body?
In a society of laws, the laws must be strictly adhered to.
Or there is no society.
The ICE officer has been shot before this occurrence. They’re trained to react within seconds. He’s within the law although our hearts are with the deceased who was in the wrong place at the wrong time. Most likely she was unstable. No stable person would be in
the tonnage of an SUV aimed for an officer with rifle. 😏. RIP . Minnesota is out of control. Please stay off the interstates.
Studies have shown that low self-control is highly correlated to criminal behavior in both genders. I suspect her parents gave in to her temper tantrums when she was a child. She would have benefitted from anger management classes. My sympathy is with the agent who almost lost his life just trying to do his job & whose life will become a nightmare going forward.
The men she tried to run over were sons, husbands and fathers. Ashli Babbit was a daughter and a wife. Your callous disregard for their lives makes me wonder about your humanity. Is there a human in your body?
That hit the nail precisely on the head.
Poor X… too busy to spend time doing some research?
Did you watch the videos?
No.
Had you watched the videos and even some pundits analysis.. you would have found out that the officer who shot her was in front of the vehicle.
The officer was seen trying to get out of the way while firing.
Not the officer who was at the side trying to open the door and pull her out of the vehicle.
What the videos show was that it was a conscious effort of the driver to attempt to evade arrest and flee the area. However because of the officer in front of her vehicle she drove right at him where her car became a weapon.
Keep in mind that the video shows that not only did the officer directly to the left of her gave her the lawful order to get out of the vehicle, she put the vehicle in reverse and then forward towards the officer in front of the vehicle.
One of the camera angles showed the officer getting clipped by her suv.
So yes, the shooting is justified. The rhetoric by the DIms is not.
The fact that you condemn the ICE agents instead of first trying to get actual evidence which others like myself and Turley have done… shows you’re a complete libtard.
-G
Golly, gee, X, “to get out of the way”? Turn the wheel works, too, crunch…
“Professor Turley also neglects to mention the officer also had a fraction of a second to get out of the way”
Correct – but that is not the requirements of the law.
Further Good was not a threat to One officer – but 4.
She either struck or nearly struck two officers when she backed violently.
She struck this officer as he approached her vehicle and ordered her out of the car.
She nearly stuck and officer in front of her vehicle
She was driving recklessly.
I think this officer should have GAMBLED that she was not going to harm anyone – atleast not seriously.
And sent a SWAT team to arrrest her later.
But that does not change the fact that his split second decision was justified.
“The ICE agent wasn’t in danger.”
Because you say so ?
There are 4 separate ICE officers that she hit or nearly hit.
Regardless she was driving recklessly and she was NOT taking any care to avoid hitting them.
While it does NOT appear that she was intentionally trying to hit them – though that is not certain.
It is clear that she was driving unsafely and recklessly and that anyone near near her was in danger.
“He put himself there”
Correct – that is his job.
He ordered her out of the car,
and he was trying to force her out of the car.
“moved to the driver side window when he could have fired straight into the windshield. ”
His arms were through the window and she stepped on the accelerator – it is completely unclear whether he had the ability to aim.
Regardless, you are clearly unfamiliar with the law
There is no requirement to “fire a warning shot”.
Further what would shooting the windshield accomplish – except make it impossible to see the officer in front of her car that she was hurtling towards.
“It’s pretty clear the officer fired into the car while he was not in any danger.”
False. He was struck by her car at the time of the shooting – AND other officers were in front of and behind her car and she was driving recklessly.
“He fired after he moved out of the way.”
In correct and irreleveant.
I know this is hard for you – but it isnot actually relevant that she was a threat to him in that millisecond before he shot.
What was relevant is that she had already driven recklessly – striking or nearly striking two other officers, and that she was not a threat to both him and the officer in front of her vehicle.
“What should be a discussion is the increasing aggression”
Of left wing nuts interfering with LEO’s.
Good is enttitled to her oppinions of ICE and immigration.
SHe is entitled top protest – even protest in the vacinity of ICE officers – even though that is incredibly stupid.
She is entitled to engage in citizen journalism.
She is NOT free to interfere with LEO’s doing their job just because she does not like their job or the law.
It is the behavior of left wing nuts that is making a very difficutl job harder.
BTW the Officer in question was highly experienced and well trained.
And contra left wing nuts many ICE officers – are LEO’s who left idiotic municiple forces like Mineapolis or Seattle.
“These people are all to happy to engage in violence against civilians knowing they will not be held accountable for their overreaching actions.”
Very Few LEO’s of any kind are looking for violence. That is when THEY get injured or even killed.
They have a tough enough job – without idiot left wing nuts interfering.
While most of their arrests go without incident – ICE arrested over 900,000 people last year
That is pretty remarkable. Contra your idiotic claim they are CLEARLY Well Trained and professional.
While most of those arrests went smoothly with little or no resistance. That is not universally true.
About 300K+ of those arrests were of people convicted of crimes in the US or elsewhere.
Abotu 400K+ were of people accused of crimes in the US. A significant portion of those are Dangerous.
“I didn’t even see Turley condemning the shooting or the lack of clear reason to do so. ”
Absent information we do not have there is no reason to.
“That agent was never hurt”
An agent was reported hospitalized.
“Not when the agent had options to avoid any harm.”
Not the standard – the question is whether Good was an immediate threat to the agent or others.
There were 4 agents surrounding her car. She was ordered to get out of the car. She was obligated to do so.
BTW there is a recent SCOTUS case on exactly that. She was NOT free to leave. She was NOT free to flee, and she was NOT free to do so recklessly endangering others. When she hit or nearly hit the two officers behind her the justification for the use of deadly force was present.
“DHS has already been caught lying to judges and the public. ”
So far it is the left that keeps getting caught lying.
“The last shooting was also unjustified.”
Nope.
“Remember Martinez?”
Very similar incident.
” She was also shot several times”
Yup
” when DHS lied about the incident.”
Nope
“She got acquitted pretty quick after reviewing the video and body cams.”
Do not recall and not relevant. You seem to think this is binary.
Had Good managed to escape – a jury might not have convicted her either.
The inability to convict Martinez is not the same as the Officers committed a crime.
This is not binary.
” ICE has been getting worse about who they recruit and how they train these people. ”
Because you say so ?
Regardless SCOTUS and left wing nut judges have deprived them of the protection of the NG.
The alternative is larger numbers of law enforcement.
“This will only make it easier for Democrats to win seats in the mid-terms.”
ROFL
“The Professor laying blame on democrats is utterly despicable, even for the professor.”
If you are interfering with LEO’s or defending those who interfere with LEO’s – YOU are the problem.
If you do not like the law – CHANGE IT.
In this case – you do that in congress.
You Do NOT do so by harrassing LEO’s who are enforcing laws you do not like.
John Say,
“ Correct – but that is not the requirements of the law.”
It is a requirement John. Officers are required to avoid any situation where they could place themselves in harm’s way. He had every opportunity NOT to put himself in front of the car. Any officer knows not to stand in front of a car without their gun drawn. If they wanted to convey the message of threat that officer would have drawn his gun the moment he got in front of the car. Not after. The moment he moved out of the way any justification to use deadly force went out of the window.
“ “Remember Martinez?”
Very similar incident.
” She was also shot several times”
Yup
” when DHS lied about the incident.”
Nope
“She got acquitted pretty quick after reviewing the video and body cams.”
Do not recall and not relevant.”
It was showing DHS lied to the judge once their body cams were shown to contradict everything they claimed. Martinez got lucky. And she did get acquitted of all charges. The point is relevant because they lied to a judge an lied about the justification for shooting her. The same be assumed of the MN incident. ICE is engaging in lawless actions and lying to judges and the public about it.
“ Regardless she was driving recklessly and she was NOT taking any care to avoid hitting them.
While it does NOT appear that she was intentionally trying to hit them – though that is not certain.”
You contradict yourself John. She was not driving recklessly she was trying to leave. ICE escalated the situation by engaging aggressively instead of ignoring her and continuing on their way. She was indeed waving them through, but some chose to escalate and attack her when she was doing nothing wrong.
The officers you claim were never in danger. They always had the ability to get out of the way. Including the officer who shot her. He chose to shoot after he moved out of the way. That is clear in the video. Even you acknowledge the officer should not have shot her. He went too far and he may face serious consequences. Trying to make excuses for his excessive use of force just makes things worse for your argument.
For the last time, she was NOT interfering with the officers. They were unnecessarily escalating the situation as they are often do.
..always a tragedy when a human gets killed.. but for this MN incident, most of the Blame lies solidly at the feet of HAKKEEM JEFFRIES & other Dem Party ‘authority’ figures!! At a press conference 1-31-25 in Brooklyn, House Minority Leader Jeffries (D-NY) made the call for violence, inciting his followers to “fight” the POTUS Agenda “in the streets.” The Dems just hoping for this to happen to use against POTUS.
You’re not the brightest penny in the pile.