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.”
Contra the left – this was a justified shooting.
However if the left continues to interfere with LEOs as they are doing long enough – there will likely be many more justified shootings,
and eventually one that is not.
ICE made nearly 1M arrests last year. You can not do 1M of anything without making a mistake.
There will be a mistake eventually. There may even be an agent that just completely looses it.
That will not be justified.
But it will be completely understandable.
And those of you on the left will be Guilty of causing the stress in LEOs such that some of them lose it.
If you do not like the law – go to congress and change the law.
If you can not do that – then the people have spoken.
The rule of law means you live according to the laws we have and you try to change them if you do not like them.
The rest of us are stuck with myriads of stupid and unconstitutional laws that you left wing nuts have imposed.
We live within those laws until we can get them changed or declared unconstitutional.
That is what the rule of law means.
The behavior like that of Good that those of you on the left engage in is LAWLESS and dangerous – it increases the risk to everyone
and it undermines the rule of law and pushes us closer to anarchy.
John
ICE made nearly 1M arrests last year. You can not do 1M of anything without making a mistake.
____________________________
So true, but it doesn’t help when the left does everything they can to get in the way of ICE or and other law enforcement.
This is very long and somewhat repetitive but it is a thorough and repeated destruction of the NYT analysis – as well as other idiotic claims that we see here.
I would note that the show the NYT video and one of the things that is clear as they sit for a long time on the frame where the officer fires the first shot is that
NO the wheels of the SUV were NOT turned at the time of the first shot was fired. The Wheels were actually perfectly straight at that moment.
As Bracca and Rikketa point our repeatedly NONE of that matters.
But it is damning of those of you on the left that even your false narrative requires lying.
Over an hour to analyze a 10 second interaction? I’m surprised you have time for that.
As the car turns to avoid the cop, the cop stops moving and aims and fires, rather than continuing to increase the clearance. She didn’t turn the steering wheel to follow his path. He put himself in that position. A position to shoot and kill her.
https://youtu.be/Fj5kDx9ZP58?t=2613
“Over an hour to analyze a 10 second interaction? I’m surprised you have time for that.”
The analysis only took a few minutes – it is just repeated over and over.
But I would point out – as the video does that the officer had a split second to make a decision.
And contra your idiocy he did NOT know in that spite second precisely What Goods intentions were.
What he KNEW was that she had taken every single prior opertunity to behave lawlessly.
That she had interfered with law enforcement – which is a fellony.
That she was trying to prevent LEOs from enforcing laws passed by congress and supported by the majority of americans.
That when she was caught she refused a lawful order to STOP.
That after doing so she behaved Recklessly – without any regard for anyone else.
With near certainty she was fleeing – and if the officer allowed her to – she would still eventually be caught.
But there was ZERO certainty that in her flight she was not going to kill or injure others.
She had already very nearly seriously injured several other officers as well as ordinary people.
Whether you like it or not – she was dangerous – she did not need to intend to be dangerous, All she needed was to be reckless.
At the time the officer fired – her engine was revved – her wheels had been spinning in the snow – When they gained traction her vehicle was going to leap forward – MAYBE it was going to leap to the right – but the officer could not know that. Nor could he know that even if it did what the NEXT thing she might run into might be.
Nor could the officer know at the moment he fired – that her SUV was not going to leap straight or to the left and crush him and other officers.
Your entire idiotc argument depends on pretending that you can predict the future at the time of the shooting based on events that had not occured.
“As the car turns to avoid the cop”
You have the order wrong.
Look at the NYT video – at the time the officer fired – the SUV tires were pointed STRAIGHT
The Officer did not know that, he also did not know they werent pointed left.
What he did know was the engine was reving and the car was going to jump forward HARD very shortly.
“the cop stops moving”
Nope – the cop never stoped moving.
“and aims and fires”
Correct – while moving.
“rather than continuing to increase the clearance.”
He was not obligated to.
You presume lots of knowledge on his part that he can not have.
The only knowledge he had for Certain is that Good was behaing lawlessly and recklessly.
She was threatening his life, the other officers present as well as anyone who might be in her path should she manage to get passed this officer.
You want to condemn the choices of the officer – who acted on the evidence he had.
But you want to ignore that Good was NOT acting rationally.
With absolute certainty she was going to get caught. ICE had her license number. The RIGHT thing to do, the thing that did not endanger anyone was to get out of the card when ordered to. At that moment the only thing she had to fear was prosecution and conviction for the acts that she had already done. Up to the point she was ordered out of the car – she had obstructed, but she had not seriously risked anyones life.
Instead she chose to Slam the car into reverse, fly back 5ft nearly hitting several people – Slam the car into forward.
Nearly breaking the arms of the officer trying to remove her from her vehicle, and then Stepping on the gas with the engine roaring.
What is obvious to Everyone but you is she was not rational.
She was going to escape at that moment – but not for good, and she was going to escape at that moment no matter who got hurt.
She may not have intentionally tried to hurt anyone – but she did, and more importantly – she did not care.
Whether you like it or not the officer was fully justified in shooting her.
“She didn’t turn the steering wheel to follow his path.”
No but she had already throw the officer trying to remove her from the car arround.
Lest make some things Clear -= if she had stopped at that moment – or if the officer had not shot her and she had managed to escape.
She would have been charged with:
Obstructing a federal LEO
resisting arrest
reckless endangerment
at least 2 possibly more counts of aggravated assault.
Probably attempted murder.
“He put himself in that position. ”
Yes, BEFORE she started her car – placed himself in front of her vehicle – so that she could not escape.
That is what Police do. They take risks to reduce the risks to others.
When she stepped on the gas and went forward – he moved to his right – fairly quickly to avoid being hit – and she STILL clipped him – that is one count of agrevated assult.
“A position to shoot and kill her.”
Yes, that is what police do to people who are an immediate threat to their life and the life of others – they KILL them.
You do not seem to understand – Your argument results in the police never arresting anyone.
Because according to you – LEOs may never carry through on a threat to use deadly force against someone who will do anything to escape.
Government is FORCE – do not EVER pass a law that you are unwilling to hace LEOs kill to enforce – because if you are not willing to have LEO’s kill to enforce a law – then the law does not exist.
I will be happy to see you agree to get rid of all the laws you are unwilling to kill to enforce.
You say the officer did nothing – but ALL the video shows him moving to his right – her left and doing so fairly rapidly.
If he did NOT – then no matter where her wheels were pointed – she would have hit him.
For you to claim that this cold-blooded murder was excusable is utterly reprehensible. While I have appreciated some of your defenses of free speech, this post crosses a line I can’t countenance. I will no longer be following your writing. Good luck.
But you had no problem whatsoever with the January 6, 2021 ACTUAL AND VERY REAL cold-blooded murder of Ashli Babbitt by Capitol Police Officer Michael Byrd, WHO WAS NEVER CHARGED. Pedestrian Ashli Babbitt had NO WEAPON whatsoever and presented absolutely NO DANGER WHATSOEVER to Office Byrd when he shot her dead. In fact, you likely told yourself, “I don’t like Ashli Babbitt protesting election fraud when a Democrat wins, so she had it coming to her. Gooid for Michae Byrd!” Of course, in the instant case, driver Renee Good AIMED her WEAPON (i.e, her car) at ICE agent Jonathan Ross, instead of immediately stopping her car as law enforcement told her to do, and proceded to accelerate in his direction. What a shameless liar, hypocrite, and fraud you are. But you are obviously proud of your depravity, deceit, and degeneracy.
Thank you
A xomparison.
Babbit was NOT clearly in possession fo a deadly weapon.
She was NOT imminently threatening the life or serious bodily injury to anyone.
At the time of the shooting the Speakers Lobby was empty – except for Byrd the Representatives had left and the doors they had passed through had closed and were presumable locked.
Babbit was NOT threatening Byrd in anyway and likely did not even know he was present.
She was NOT being detained by LEOs at the time and attempting to flee.
About the only factors in common are that both Good and Babbit were women and both shooters were officers.
Byrd shot Babbit from an Oblique angle with not just a crowd behind her and in the trajoectory of his bullet – but Other CP officers behind her.
Byrds shot was a text book bad shooting – both fromt he perspective of Justification and from the prespoective or just sadety precautions while using a weapon.
Conversely Good was inside a 5000lb running SUV – by Minesota law that is a presumptive deadly weapon – even when it is not being used intentionally to harm.
BTW by law a deadly weapon is NOT a gun or Firearm – it is Anything that can be used to kill or seriously harm someone that in the circumstances of the moment can reasonably be perceived by the person using deadly force as a threat.
A shoelace is a deadly weapon if wrapped arround your throat. It is not if it is in your shoes.
An SUV is a deadly weapon if it is moving generally towards you and or others in a reckless and dangerous fashion.
Good is dead and we have no idea what her intentions were.
Regardless a Running SUV pointed at you is a “deadly Weapon” – in circumstances similar to the Minesota shooting – a Baltimore Cop was murdered last year. She confronted a person in another vehicle – she got out of her vehcile gun drawn, asked the other person to get out of their vehicle. They started to exit and then stepped on the gas, The officer hestitated less than a second and was killed as she was struck by the other vehicle.
A standing SUV with engine running IS a deadly weapon – regardless of the unknown intentions of the driver.
Both Good and Babbit had previously and were arguably at the moment committing crimes.
While it is arguable that H6ers were not tresspassing when they entered the Capital, they were when they were busting out windows to break into private spaces inside the Capital. The Speakers lobby is niot a public space, and Babbit was NOT allowed to break into it.
Doing so was a crime.
Good aparently had been obstructing ICE all day – she had blocked ICE vehilces at this location as well as at several nearby locations earlier in the day. Arguments that Good had no idea these were ICE agents is nonsense – she was actively seeking out ICE agents to obstruct and she found them. Good was guilty of felonly obstruction of LEOs.
No one was seeking to aresst Babbit at the time she was shot.
I beleive Officer Byrd has claimed he identified himself as a police officer but no such notice is found in any of the video and none of the officers on the side of the door with Babbit heard him identify himself.
There is no evidence that Babbit was aware of Byrd’s presence, She just statted through the window and was shot in the neck
Conversely there were atleast 4 ICE officers surrounding Good, The Officer who fired traveled counter clockwise arround the back of the vehicle – recording it with is phone stopping in Front of her vehicle as another officer approached her door and ordered her to get out of the car. At that moment Good was NOT free to go. Everything she did from that point forward was Resisting arrest. Resisting arrest is NOT sufficient alone to justify the use of deadly force, but it is another crime.
Babbit was not ordered to stop and she was not resisting arrest.
Good threw her car into reverse turning he wheels all the war to the left and backed up about 5ft – nearly striking officer and other people.
There was ice and snow on the ground so her car was slipping and wheels spinning.
She then threw the car into forward as the ICE officer attempted to phycially remove her from the vehicle and stepred on the gas turning her wheels to the right. That constituted an assault on the officer trying to remove her from the vehicle as well as an assault on the officer standing in front of her SUV. Good was attempting to accelearate rapidly – which you can tell by the sound of the engine and sping of the wheels, But the car did not accelerate significantly until the wheels gained purchase on the road. Before Good attempted to move forward, The officer in front of the vehicle started drawing his weapon by the time the vehicle started moving the gun was aimed at the drivers side windsheild and he fired his first shot through the drivers side window.
Byrd was not attempting to arrest anyone, nor was he providing cover for anyone else attempting to make an arrest.
Babbit was not presenting a threat of anything except Tresspassing on an unoccupied space.
Several idiots are claiming that the officer in the good shooting had a duty to retreat – this is stupid and false.
That would mean that no police officer anywhere could ever arrest anyone who posed a threat.
Neither Byrd nor the ICE agent had a duty to retreat. No LEO has a duty to retreat.
There are some circumstances in some states where there is a duty for an ordinary person to retreat if possible – but the determination is subjective, and requires that the person KNOW they can safely retreat. Further in most states you do not have a duty to retreat on your own property and especially in your own home.
The circumstances are Radically different.
Ashli Babbitt was the spearhead to a large angry mob who breached the window and climbed through it in spite of repeated warnings to stop. If she got by she would have been the first of a flood.
So ? Not a single protested on J6 killed anyone.
Absolutely Babbit would have been the first of many – to an empty speakers lobby.
Accutally Babbit did NOT ignore repeated warings to stop – if you get the long version fo the video – the who trip down to the speakers lobby – the entire group she was with was stopped at doord and other places REPEATEDLY by the CP – they told the group to stop and when the area ahead was clear they were allowed to proceed to the next impeditment.
And even if you only watch the last minute of Babbits life – 3 CP officers were on the same side of the doors as she was – and they stopped the protestors from proceeding. Babbit did NOT go through the broken window until the speakers lobby was empty and the 3 officers on her side of the door moved away from the door to allow protestors to proceed.
As with this Good shooting – those of you on the left make claims based on ignorance of the facts – based on what you want to beleive rather than what actually occured.
LOL.. what a fool. You have proof of you’re comment. You know you don’t.
Just throwing BS out there.
” as she sped toward him in a vehicle”
At no point was the vehicle aimed at him. The first shot could only be place from alongside the vehicle.
Not that facts will stop the false claims.
It’s also against policy to shoot at fleeing suspects and it was recommended a long time ago that they not shoot at a vehicle when the only problem is the vehicle. It leaves the vehicle out of control and dangerous to agents and bystanders, which is what happened here. The training is to step to the side and let the vehicle pass. There is also the matter of shouting conflicting messages and drawing guns to shoot without warning.
This cop previously hooked his arm through a window of a car and refused to let go as the driver sped from the scene. He, no doubt, had PTSD from that event and may have been looking for revenge. There were 3 shots fired, only one through the windshield, and the other two through the open side window – at that point he was clearly not in danger.
ICE also delayed medical attention saying the EMTs were only seconds away. Oddly, bleeding out takes only seconds; they were desperate to eliminate the victim and primary witness.
Yes. This was a calculated murder. Set up a situation that doesn’t quite endanger the agent, claim the agent felt endangered and shoot to kill.
But you had no problem whatsoever with the January 6, 2021 ACTUAL AND VERY REAL cold-blooded murder of Ashli Babbitt by Capitol Police Officer Michael Byrd, WHO WAS NEVER CHARGED. Pedestrian Ashli Babbitt had NO WEAPON whatsoever and presented absolutely NO DANGER WHATSOEVER to Office Byrd when he shot her dead. In fact, you likely told yourself, “I don’t like Ashli Babbitt protesting election fraud when a Democrat wins, so she had it coming to her. Good for Michael Byrd!” Of course, in the instant case, driver Renee Good AIMED her WEAPON (i.e, her car) at ICE agent Jonathan Ross, instead of immediately stopping her car as law enforcement told her to do, and proceded to accelerate in his direction. But here, you favor the illegal alien mass invasion of America and hate the enforcement of immigration laws, so in your fake-view, Renee Good is an innocent victim and ICE agent Jonathan Ross is an evil enforcer of the law. What a shameless liar, hypocrite, and fraud you are. But you are obviously proud of your depravity, deceit, and degeneracy.
“At no point was the vehicle aimed at him.”
Idiotically false – the office moved from right to left accross the front of the vehicle while in the middle opf this Good moved from left to right.
For most of the time the vehicle was aimed at the officer.
” The first shot could only be place from alongside the vehicle.”
The first and likely fatal shot went through the front windsheild.
“It’s also against policy to shoot at fleeing suspects”
Policy is not law and that is NOT actually the policy.
First there is no policy regarding standing in front of vehicles that are not moving.
With respect to fleeing vehicles the assesment is dependent on many factors.
How close you are to the vehicle is the person fleeing a danger to you or others.
Are you able to shoot into the vehcle without risk of hitting people outside the vehicle.
and myriads of other factors.
“The training is to step to the side and let the vehicle pass.”
False, Again depends on circumstances. Further that is NOT always possible.
In this case with the vehicle starting from a stop and moving left and the officer moving right the officer was still hit by the vehicle.
There is no policy to step aside when you can not step aside.
Again such decisions must be made under the cicumstances.
there are multiple choices. In this instance the officer went left and the car went right.
If the officer had gone right he would have been hit.
If you actually watch the NYT video and ignore the comentary you will note that.
The vehicle started with its wheels turned LEFT not right.
That contra NYT and others – the office could NOT see the wheels – both because they were not visible to him and because he was nearly against the car when it was stoped and looking at the driver not the ground and the hood was between him and the tires.
Further it is crystal clear that when the first shot was fired the Car’s wheels were STRAIGHT and that it is the Officer who managed to evade the car not the driver who turned away from the officer.
“There is also the matter of shouting conflicting messages and drawing guns to shoot without warning.”
There were no conflicting messages – Good was ordered to :”get the F#$K out of the car” – what part of that is unclear ?
When she failed to do so – a different officer tried to remove her by FORCE – which is perfectly legal.
That is when she decided to shift into revers and then throw the car into forward.
There is no requirement to warn someone before drawing a gun or shooting. Nor was their time to do so.
Drawing a gun is a clear warning – STOP or I will shoot. Good did not stop.
“This cop previously hooked his arm through a window of a car and refused to let go as the driver sped from the scene. ”
False and irrelevant.
“The *first shot* could only be place [sic] from alongside the vehicle.” (emphasis added)
You might want to look at the actual *evidence*. The first shot was through the *windshield*. Which of course means that the officer was in *front* of the car as the attempted murderer sped toward him — in her 4,000 pound deadly *weapon.*
Ano
This cop previously hooked his arm through a window of a car and refused to let go as the driver sped from the scene.
____________________________
Did you rally say this. He refused to let go. SHE refused to stop. That’s her fault, she was fleeing from law enforcement.
There have been NO articles, videos, podcaats, etc. that have compared the January 7, 2026 shooting by ICE agent Jonathan Ross of Renee Good to the January 6, 2021 shooting by Capitol Police Officer Michael Byrd of Ashli Babbitt. Of course, THIS is what the media should be discussing–but won’t.
In Michael Byrd’s case, Byrd clearly shot Ashli Babbitt when she presented no danger whatsoever to him and Ashli did not have any weapon whatsoever to harm anyone with. Yet, despite all this, the DOJ cleared Michael Byrd and DECLINED to press any charges against him, even though the video evidence clearly establishes that Officer Byrd murdered Ashli Babbitt.
Now, in the instant case, the circumstances are remarkeably similar EXCEPT for one critical difference. In the Minneapolis case, Renee Good DID have a potentially deadly weapon: her automobile, which was aimed directly at ICE agent Ross while she accelerated. People can agree or disagree with what each law enforcement officer should do in their individual circumstances, but if the question is what legal action should be taken in the case of Ice agent Ross, then the legal decision to CLEAR Ross of any culpability was ALREADY set by the precedential case involving Capitol Officer Michael Byrd.
In short, since Capitol Officer Michael Byrd escaped scot-free of any punishment whatsoever when the evidence indicates actual murder, given that there was NO threat whatsoever posed by unarmed pedestrian Ashli Babbitt, then, clearly, ICE agent Jonathan Ross should similarly–and quickly–BE FOUND INNOCENT of any charges whatsoever, given that Renee Good DID have a potentially lethyl weapon (i.e., her automobile in motion) aimed directly at ICE agent Ross immediately prior to Ross firing his gun at Wood in her automobile.
But is ANYONE in the media comparing THESE two SIMILAR cases? Nope. They choose, instead, to ignore reality and promote the Leftist-Marxist rubbish narrative involving Office Derick Chavin and George Floyd, when Floyd died primarily from long-term fentanyl overdoses, which caused his lungs to inflate with fluids to more than twice their normal size, making breathing extraordinaily difficult if not impossible. Yet, Police Officer Derek Chauvin is sitting in prison for his entire life when he was 100% INNOCENT of the charges brought against him by lying and cowardly witnesses and a rotten, corrupt legal system. Of course, since the Leftist-Marxists have gotten away with murdering Ashi Babbitt and have also gotten away with imprisoning an INNOCENT law enforcement officer, Derek Chauvin, with a Kangaroo Court con job through and through, they now seek another successful perversion and corruption of the legal system with a case against ICE agent Ross.
Feds Cut Minnesota Out Of Investigation
Minnesota officials and federal authorities escalated their dispute Thursday over an immigration officer’s fatal shooting of a woman in Minneapolis, with state leaders saying the Trump administration was blocking local agents from an FBI investigation into the killing and preventing them from accessing evidence.
The administration’s decision to take sole control of the investigation, combined with President Donald Trump and other officials’ staunch backing of the ICE officer’s actions, marks a break from some past instances in which local, state and federal officials worked together on high-profile probes, including in Minnesota.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2026/01/08/minnesota-ice-shooting-protests/
………………………………….
There’s no good reason the Feds can’t work with state and local investigators. Consequently the investigation will be tainted from day one.
Yes there is both the Governor and the mayor have show that law enforcement can not trust them.
They threw Chauvin and other officers under the bus and rigged a trial against them.
Floyd at his stash and likely that of his dealer, he had 3 times fatal doses of multiple drugs.
Floyd was removed from the Crusier at his own demand and because he was out of control and destroying the crusier – and this is not the first time that happened with floyd.
To the extent there was any negigence it was on the part of EMTs who despite being 3 blocks away took 13minues to arrive.
Floyd might have been saved had they arrived in a few minutes.
Regardless there is absolutely no chance that the Feds are going to allow people answering to the mayor or Governor to investigate.
If DHS/ICE allowed MN to “Floyd” this officer – half of ICE agents would quit – just as half of Minneapolis officer quit after the Chauvin kangaroo court.
I would further note there are rumored indictments of ranking MN government officials coming down in the Somali Fraud cases.
Including possibly WAlz and Elias.
No the Feds are not going to let an AG they are investigating for Fraud investigate one of their own.
Remember john.
The police were told NOT to help ICE. So now they want to be involved. (yeah right)
The Minneapolis PD has not been known for its abilities lately.
Did they detect any of a panoply of social services frauds? No.
The most that they were seen to do was drive citizen journalists away from one of the ghost daycares, at the fraudsters’ request.
And don’t forget that they employed Derek Chauvin as a TRAINING OFFICER.
Impeding armed federal agents from doing their job, disobeying a federal officer, accelerating a large SUV at an armed federal agent with probable intent to harm or kill him? What else can one expect?
This will obviously be investigated and when the evidence is carefully analyzed and considered, then and only then can a solid comment be made about this incident.
There are some politicians who are dangerously close to incitement of rebellion (if they have not already crossed the. line). There are media personalities who need to be careful what they say or they will wind up on the losing side of a lawsuit.
In the meantime, if someone is dumb enough to obstruct federal law enforcement, they might consider getting their affairs in order and make sure they have a rainy day fund for their legal expenses.
I say to the federal agents who are investigating the massive fraud in Minnesota and other places, don’t let up, even for a moment.
MAGA defenders pretend these ICE raids and sweeps are normal. They’re not! The public SHOULDN’T get used to this craziness. Once we get used to it, we’re finished as a democracy.
So true. America should never enforce its laws. You’re really, really smart, Einstein!
“MAGA defenders pretend these ICE raids and sweeps are normal. They’re not! ”
Correct – there were about half as many under Obama and maybe 1/4 as many under Biden.
What they are is following the law. Obama was required to do that – and failed.
Biden was required to do that and failed even worse.
You rant about Trump’s supposed lawlessness – but in fact your problem with him is that he DOES follow the law.
And that should be EXACTLY what we want from a president.
If you do not like what Trump is doing – just change the law.
We the people – through congressmen – democrats and republicans passed the laws Trump is enforcing.
But Biden and Obama dif not like the laws we enacted – so THEY did their own thing.
That has unfortunately become the NORM for presidents – espcially democrats.
It is normal. It is not lawful.
If we can not trust that presidents we like will enforce the laws we do not like, how can we trust that president we do not like will enforce laws we do like ?
The rule of law requires that we enforce the law that we have – and change it if we do not like it.
You are free to protest ICE. But that is stupid and unproductive.
You will get nowhere – except possibly creating more violence and getting more people killed.
If you do not like the law ICE is enforcing – use your first amendment rights to change the law – not to try to get people to not enforce a law you do not like.
In what world do you think it i s a good idea for the president or law enforcement to decide which laws to ignore ?
Trump is not the problem.
ICE is not the problem.
YOU are the problem.
Even if you honestly want more legal immigration – you are STILL the problem.
The rule of law, not man
Means we change the law to get what we want – not change the people.
“The public SHOULDN’T get used to this craziness.”
The public absolutely should expect that law enforcement enforce the law.
If you are really and trruly correct – and people really do not want these immigration laws – then the best way to get rid of them is to enforce them as that will impact the way people vote. And if the issue is important enough to enough people – the result will be changing the law.
“Once we get used to it, we’re finished as a democracy.”
We have always been “finished as a democracy” – The US is a constitutional republic.
But that does not matter – we are finished as a nation – the further we get from the rule of law – not the rule of man.
If you expect Trump and ICE to follow other laws that you like – you must expect they will follow and enforce the ones you do not.
Trump follows the law..???? He’s a convicted felon!!!!
You communists really believe you can tell the “Big Lie” and fool the populace.
If you do, it will be because it consists of unworthy but useful idiots.
That will be gone soon enough.
Regardless he was acquitted by the national jury of voters.
If BINO, Biden in name only, hadn’t let in 10-15 million unvetted, unskilled, uneducated, unvaccinated foreign speaking people we wouldn’t have to have mass deportations. This is on you, your team and your policies. You killed the woman in MN, it is on your shoulders.
Liberals believe in making laws, but not in enforcing them.
Make it make sense.
Well then, if Biden had not let all these illegals and crooks into our country, this wouldn’t have been an issue.
Be we know for a fact. Neither Biden and the dem party did nothing to control this. They let it happen by opening our borders.
So go blame them!
To borrow from Joe Patrice of AboveTheLaw, the one that is “no longer a human being” is the corpse. Apparently Turley has never gotten out of the way of a car without shooting a mother in the face before.
a mother that tries to drive through someone else is either going to be a murderer or get killed.
You make it sound like the officer was jay walking and he should have just dodged the car. You lie.
So Good was up to no good? That’s not good for Good because Good is now good and dead Good…
Do you understand me? Good
Release the Walz Fraud Files!
TDS- The Movie
Dan Goldman is a leading cause for antisemitism in America.
That is not fair to other Jews and especially conservative Jews. Do you hate all Irishmen when one does something bad? Englishmen? French people? Italians? Cubans? Nope, you only hate Jews when one is a moron.
HB
I don’t hate Jewish people, your assertion is reflexive and is wrong. Think of the poor image that Jews like Soros, Elias and Epstein have reflected upon the people. They are the problem, not people like me.
As you look at all segments of society, eventually your approach is that of a misanthrope, since no normal group is left without its bad apples. If applied consistently, it would condemn everyone. But if it is not, one has to presume one of two things: either individual behavior is selectively elevated into a collective blame, or hostility toward Jews is masked as a critique. It is also possible that you are Jewish and care about Jews, but are so embarrassed by certain individual behavior that it has displaced clear thinking.
Frame By Frame In Slow Motion
ICE agent jumps to the side just in time. Front tire is pointing in other direction. No need to shoot.
https://www.nytimes.com/video/us/100000010631041/minneapolis-ice-shooting-video.html
ICE Agent struck by Good’s vehicle. Literally hit by Good. ICE Agent can’t see the tires. And ICE Agent had to decide in less than a half-second whether Good, who ignored lawful orders to exit her vehicle and chose to illegally flee, was trying to hit him or not. Good chose poorly, and died as the direct result of her own illegal actions.
It does not matter if the officer could see the tires.
All that matters is that Once Good started acting recklessly and was a threat to others, the justification to use deadly force ends when she is no longer a threat to others.
Stopping the car would end the threat. Changing directions does not.
John Say, shooting the driver did not stop the car. ICE policy about shooting at drivers of vehicles is clear – don’t.
False. Policy is not law nor is that what the policy says, such decisions are OBVIOUSLY specific to circumstances – which is precisely why they are not law.
And shooting the driver DID stop the car, just not immediately. It prevented a potention high speed chase through the neighboohood in the snow with people all over the place at risk.
Are you arguing that the officer should have shot good Sooner ?
“Are you arguing that the officer should have shot good Sooner ?”
No, the troll is arguing that the officer should have shot at the brake pad in such a way that the bullet lodged between the plates, causing the car to stop almost instantly. 🙂 This is the same nutcase who constantly argues with you and me absent judgement or any regard for the truth.
She was told to exit and under arrest. She tried to flee with an office stranding in front of her car. Bad choice by her.
All she had to do was get out of the car.
You don’t need to see the tires if you can see the driver turning the wheel and you know he could see the driver because he blew her brains out. Also, if the car was aimed at him when she floored it it would have hit him; it didn’t. Therefore the car was not aimed at him. He chose to stand where he did. You cannot claim self-defense when taking actions that would tend to increase the danger even if, as in this case, the driver had no intention to drive into him.
“You don’t need to see the tires if you can see the driver turning the wheel and you know he could see the driver because he blew her brains out.”
You do not know exactly what he could see – the windsheild is tilted and you do not know whether he had a clear view of the steering wheel, even if it was not. What we do know is that the engine was reving – the Gas pedal was depressed you can HEAR that in the video,
Further the wheels spin before gaining trction.
Finally even in the NYT video at the time the first shot was fired – the Car wheels were Straight.
” Also, if the car was aimed at him when she floored it it would have hit him; it didn’t.”
The car was on snow and ice. The ties spun and then gained traction – but the engine was revved.
And the SUV did hit him and he was injured and treated in the hospital.
“Therefore the car was not aimed at him.”
Of course it was.
“He chose to stand where he did. ”
Ansolutely – he chose that when the care was NOT moving.
“You cannot claim self-defense when taking actions that would tend to increase the danger”
Of course you can – and in fact Police officers MUST do so all the time.
Police CHOSE to take risks to protect others.
Frankly they are REQUIRED to
If your claim was correct – no one could ever be arrested. The perpetrator would threaten and the police would have to run away.
Do you think before you write ?
“even if, as in this case, the driver had no intention to drive into him.”
Probably not, but not relevant.
What is relevant is the Officers perception not the perpitrators intent.
Regardless she was OBVIOUSLY driving recklassly – hshe hit or nearly hit several ICE officers as well as others.
Had she not been shot she would have faced multiple charges of agrevated assault.
You do not have to intend to harm someone.
All you have to do is act with reckless disregard for their life.
Which she did.
I think she was clearly fleeing – which is also a crime.
But she did not think about the possibility that others could be hurt as she fled.
That is reckless disrgard.
And if Mayor Jacob Frey had not refused to deploy Minneapolis police for crowd control and to protect the demonstrators from the consequences of their bad decisions, Nicole Good would likely be alive today. I’m sorry. Her blood is on his hands.
If she was prepared to run over one agent she probably was prepared to run over others.
If the first officer had done nothing the next one in front of her may have died.
Basically the lesson is not to try to drive over anyone, particularly law enforcement.
Apparently they left that gem out in her training to be an anti-Ice radical.
This was during a workday and her girlfriend/wife was filming the incident.
One wonders who is paying for this?
The police are charged with stopping the threat to officers and to the public.
Apparently kids at compulsory school in Uvalde aren’t the “public” – Big balls in uniform generally ever act to save their own balls. Incidents like this prove they are small balls. All there blue line is going to “testify” I’d of done the same thing. Yet none them even reaching for deadly force. I was so Maga. But this is too much. The policy was good. Noems execution bad. The optics jd and noem….repulsive. it’s a liscense for feds to kill. Their leaders aren’t even going to wait for facts. There is a way to circle the wagon and deescalate – but the great negotiator et al are drunk on force.
Nothing like a liberal to use group guilt to argue his point. I guess all radical leftists should be blamed for what this woman did yesterday???
See, it wouldn’t be group guilt if every police department issued a statement calling the Uvalde police cowards and refused to hire any of them, ever.
They don’t. They all cover it up with “split second” even though it was 77 minutes from the start until the police entered the room where the gunman had been killing children. 77 minutes. How many split-seconds is that?
You have nothing to fear from ICE if you are not breaking the law.
Donot interfere with LEOs doing their job.
If you do not like the law – take that up with congress – not LEOs.
ICE cleared an entire apartment building, kicked in every door, destroyed property, detained everyone. About 20% of the occupants was immigrants. The other 80% were American citizens. Many found that items had been stolen either by ICE agents or others as the building was not secured and all the doors were too damaged to close.
These are Gestapo 2.0.
How will taking this up with Congress get jobs back, property back, broken items repaired or replaced?
John Say, you are insane.
First – ATS – why should I beleive you ?
Regardless – as I said before ICE made nearly 1M arressts in 2025 – about 1/3 were convicted criminals and another 3rd were alleged criminals.
Do you think that Government is ever capable of doing ANYTHING on million times without making any mistakes ?
LEOs make mistakes all the time – some are even corrupt. Local cops, state cops federal cops.
We can strive for perfection we will NEVER get it.
If we can not have law enforecment without perfection – we are chosing o live in anarchy
Absolutely we should always strive to do better,
but the claim that LEOs are imperfect therefore we should stop enforcing the law is lunatic.
Do I beleive your story – nope.
Do I beleive that ICE has a perfect record – nope.
Though I would note they certaintly are far less corrupt that Minnesota who lost $9B to fraud – do you think that ICE has stolen $9B in the past year ?
If you catch an ICE agent committing a crime – arrest and prosecute them.
With respect to your claims.
“ICE cleared an entire apartment building, kicked in every door”
If you open your door when they announce it will not get kicked in.
“destroyed property”
That is commonplace when LEOs serve warrants.
Though I would note that ICE searches for people – not little baggies of drugs – people are easier to find – the do not hide in Melania’s lingerie drawer. So NO I do nto beleive that ICE is routinely destroying property – it is not necescrary
One should never bet that the police are going to do something they do not have to.
Destroyed property creates headaches.
“detained everyone.”
LEOs can do that.
“About 20% of the occupants was immigrants. The other 80% were American citizens.”
So ? Do you think if DEA raids a crackhouse that they do not detain everyone as they sort things out ?
“Many found that items had been stolen either by ICE agents or others as the building was not secured and all the doors were too damaged to close.”
Yup, likely that happens.
Also happens when the police serve warrants. It is just how law enforcement works.
“These are Gestapo 2.0.”
Idiots who have absolutely no idea what real fascism looks like who are closer to actual fascists themselves should not be making stupid claims.
The Gestopo raided people at night, whisked them away and tortured them and murdered them and raped women.
The people who brought these illegals across the border do those things – ICE does not.
“How will taking this up with Congress get jobs back, property back, broken items repaired or replaced?”
It will not accomplish any of that. Why ? Because illegal immigration is unpopular. Congress is not going to change the laws – because people want the laws we have.
But if the majority of people actually wanted what left wing nuts want – congress would make the changes you want.
“John Say, you are insane.”
Ad hominem is not argument.
grow a brain. Government is FORCE. All laws are imposed by FORCE. If a law is resisted sufficiently – deadly FORCE will be used.
If you enlightened left wing morons were to decide that deadly FORCE can not be used. – than law will cease to exist.
In short order everyone will no that if they resist sufficiently the law will not be enforced.
If you do not like the law – change it.
Until then obey it.
If you can’t change it – then you must obey it.
Otherwise – you can expect to face LEOs using FORCE – including deadly FORCE if you are unwilling to comply.
That is a restatement of the social contract – the principle that allows humans to live together in units larger than tribes.
Si, seengyor!
Premise “if she was intending…. ” was she and ere there others? explain why Ross shot her 2x through drivers side window too? And if she’d been such a routine obstructor…had they considered her a threat before? Had Ross ever encountered her before? See the “defense” is as quick to judge or parrot noem and vance ….as the people who see it as murder.
Shot one was sidewise through edge of wind shield. Shots two and 3 through drivers side window. See if a Minn Grand jury indict s. Btw I don’t think just bc he got stitches before …. weren’t the ice the aggressors then? Always grabbing at cars that can move?. Idea….close off the block first for operations. Then if barricades are broken … dah. But now it does really feel like the feds are trying to stoke….when all immigrants are bad guys and all others are domestic terrorists. Maga didn’t vote for this.
I don’t need to read her mind.
Her objectively visible actions speak for her.
She blocked the street to interfere with federal officers while her wife filmed for some purpose.
It was a lawless, planned stunt that created a chaotic and dangerous situation.
She did not obey instructions,
She drove her vehicle with reckless disregard endangering one person and potentially endangering others.
If she hadn’t trained to obstruct federal officers and hadn’t gone on to actually do it, she would still be alive.
If she had followed instructions and gotten out of the car when told, she would still be alive.
Every act was an escalation that increased the risk for everyone present.
Her actions revealed a person who needed to be stopped.
Young,
Where did this training take place? When did it take place? Who performed the training? How could it be planned without input from ICE about their schedule?
If ICE would concentrate on the murderers and rapists and so forth instead of productive taxpayers then there would not be this amount of upset. But tackling people on their way to take the citizenship oath is not acceptable.
She claimed to be a constitutional observer – that is a group that trains people to observe ICE and document their actions.
The group – atleast formally claims NOT to teach people to interfere with LEOs.
But Good claimed to be part of that group and also actively interfered with LEOs.
“Where did this training take place? When did it take place?”
It is not pertinent to the action. If answered, your next step is to ask if she got a diploma. That is meaningless BS from a troll.
“If ICE would concentrate on the murderers and rapists and so forth instead of productive taxpayers”
It is the actions of those you love that make it impossible to concentrate on the murderers and rapists. Troll.
Poor Anon.
Free clue… read Turley’s article or go watch the interview of him on Fox.
He covered this.
-G
“If”. However, clearly she didn’t so clearly she wasn’t going to drive over anyone.
Here’s a question. How are cops certain that no one will try to drive over a cop some day? Isn’t that justification to blow the brains out of any driver they see?
“How are cops certain that no one will try to drive over a cop some day? ”
Good was surrounded by LEOs and chose to gun her car in reverse and then forward reckless disregard for those LEOs as well as anyone else near her. She also refused to obey lawful orders to get out of the car.
All those are huge clues that she is a threat to life and limb.
BTW cops are frequently injured or killed by drivers at traffic stops.
It does not happen every time – but it happens alot.
There are over 100 reported instances of ICE officers being rammed by cars.
Ano
“If”. However, clearly she didn’t so clearly she wasn’t going to drive over anyone.
____________________________
Why did she block the ICE truck. Knowing it would get her in trouble. When told by officer to her to get out of the car, because she was under arrest. She didn’t care and tried to run hitting the officer.
The fault lies with her.
Not the standard
NYT says “from multiple angles – but does not show all the angles.
But it really does not matter.
Good was interfering with ICE – before this video.
She was going to be arrested – and KNEW it.
She was ORDERED to leave her vehicle.
Instead she backed into or nearly backed into two other officers, and then accelerated forward striking a 3rd.
She was inarguably reckless and a danger to others.
Once you aim a weapon at someone – you are a danger to everyone until you put the weapon down – not until you point it a different direction.
Putting the weapon down meant stopping the car and getting out. Not trying to flee the scene at high speed.
If you have to go frame by frame – you have already lost the argument.
By going Frame by Frame you are ceding that there was a point the officer was justified in shooting good.
Once you cede that – it is NOT sufficient that she point the weapon elsewhere – she must put it down.
I would note that there were people and vehcles all over – behind her, to the left, in front, and even to the right and down the street.
Good had already struck or nearly struck two officers behind her.
She had struck the officer in front of her.
She was threatening to drag the officer trying to open her car door and remove her down the road.
Even after she turned her wheels – assuming that she did so before the office pulled the trigger – and if you need to frame by frame you have lost that argument. She was still a threat to the officer in front of her -who was being tossed by her car – and anyone else on the street to the officers left. That is other law enforcement Pedestrians, cars.
Your NYT argument is “Oh the person with the loaded gun stopped pointing the gun at me and started aiming in a different direction.
Not a “known safe” direction – just a different one.
The justification for the use of lethal force is a threat to the life or serious bodily injury of yourself or others.
The justification to use deadly force ends when the weapon is safe – not merely pointed in a different direction.
Good ws ordered out of the car.
That was what she needed to do.
Not Change her aim.
Which law says “obstruction” equals execution on the spot?
The weapon, the car, careened out of control after the driver was murdered. It was far less safe at that point because of the murder.
The officer in front made no contact with the car.
“Which law says “obstruction” equals execution on the spot?”
All laws are enforced by …. FORCE, if that FORCE is resisted by LETHAL FORCE.
If that is not the case – no one will obey the law.
Frame by Frame in slower motion, Ice agent is in front of car when vehicle LUNGES FORWARD. Split second decision goes to Ice Agent: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-c9Wl0keSM
In the many seconds before this the agent decided to put himself in that position. Like a human bollard he decided that he would be the barrier against which the vehicle would be stopped. However, she turned the wheel and he would clearly see the steering wheel being turned, and know that he was not in the path anymore. That angered him and he killed her out of rage and frustration that she would be able to defy his manly manliness. All 2 inches of it.
lease watch the videos – ignroe the NYT comentary and look at the actual fact.
And engage your brain.
Instead of trying to find loopholes to sever your ideology try to figure out whether you can make society work in the way you claim it ought.
If you can not use FORCE and ultimately deadly FORCE to enforce laws – you do not have laws you have suggestions.
FAFO!
As soon as you listed Dan Goldman as the opinion, I knew the opinion was without merit; you thusly saved me time to avoid this article. Sorry.
Agent is right handed. He shot her through front windshield and bullet went through her head. In order to do this he had to be in front of her moving car. Case closed.
. Give us the forensics report you have, anon.
Thanks,
🌲
No, Phony, he jumped to side while firing.
How do you know the side of windshield bullet went through her head,? If so why did he shoot 2 more times through drivers window (open) when not in front. Why didn’t the dude who reached into suv ever draw a gun? Not even reach for his to save his buddy about to be run over? Their training can’t be just shoot. How many others had even drawn a weapon. Once the auto moved? None Ross’s buddies cared about him about to maybe get bumped a smidget? Also if it was a front or awd…Ross didn’t have to “see” the turned tires. Unless he’s deaf and no experience snow and ice….he knew. ..in the instinctive split second to react …. that he wasn’t getting run over. Yet he was “trained” to shoot 2 and 3 from the safe side? Let’s see what a minn grand jury says. It’s possible 2 cases. A state one and a federal one. But what is appalling is…the jd vance and Ms noem circling wagons….so quick and asking we the people to unsee…a homicide.
It does not matter what bullet hit her in the head.
We Know that atleast onre Bullet went through the windsheild.
We do not know how many bullets were fired – there are reports of two or three.
Officers are generally taught not to fire single shots, but to empty the clip.
Regardless If the first bullet was justified – any others in close proximity are.
We do not know that other bullets went through the driver side window – while that seems likely – it is not known.
We do not even know for certin there were other shots.
But lets asume – as the best case scenarion that the officer fired three times while moving to her left – his right to avoid getting mowed down.
Meanwhile she turns right it is her turning to the right as much as anything else that caused her to get hit in the head.
Of course the officer was a 10 yr veteran and a marxman.
It is likely he hit what he was aiming for.
It’s not a clip, you jerk. You cannot say anything about gun use if you don’t know how guns work. So say the 2nd Amendment backers.
He was not in a position to get mowed down. If he was, the speeding and out of control car with a corpse jamming the gas pedal to the floor would have hit him. He was safely to the side and could not have been hit.
“It’s not a clip”
That is a turn of phrase commonly used for the complete load of a gun
We do not know the actual gun used.
Regardless LEOs pretty much NEVER fire single shots if they fire at all.
Outside of shotguns and high powered rifles most handguns do not have the stopping power to assure that what you shot will not kill you if you only shoot it once.
“you jerk.”
Ad Hominem is such an effective argument.
” You cannot say anything about gun use if you don’t know how guns work.”
I did not say how a gun works. I said how LEOs are trained – are you debating that.
We do not know the gun used in this case.
” So say the 2nd Amendment backers.” This is not about the 2A nor how guns work. It is about how LEOs are trained.
Frankly most people trained for self defense are trained the same way.
Self defense is not target shooting against a paper target.
“He was not in a position to get mowed down. If he was, the speeding and out of control car with a corpse jamming the gas pedal to the floor would have hit him.”
She did. He was hosptialized – he was struck but managed to still get out of the way – watch the video.
” He was safely to the side and could not have been hit.”
Not when he fired the first shot – bullets generally travel in a straight line – not a hook.
The first bullet went through the windsheild and if he had been to her left it would not have hit her.
“Why didn’t the dude who reached into suv ever draw a gun?”
Because he had both hands in the SCU trying to open the door and remove Good.
When she tried to flee.
“Their training can’t be just shoot.”
When you or others are in danger of loss of life or serious bodily injury – the use of deadly force is justifed.
“How many others had even drawn a weapon.”
Each officer was in different circumstances and saw different things.
The officer beside her – had both hands tied up dealing with her and her car door.
The officers behind the SUC were trying to regain their balance after she backed into them and had no clear shot.
Did the shooting stop the car? If not then it wasn’t worthwhile. Instead the car clearly went out of control and crashed – exactly what the ICE agency review of deadly force said happens and why shooting drivers should only be done if the driver is armed.
Of course it was worthwhile. even if it did not immediately stoip the car – it DID stop the car
There was no high speed chase though minneapolis endangerous the police and others.
If she did not get out of the car when ordered.
If she chose to try to escape – why do you think she would have just stopped a few yards down the road ?
High speed chases are extremely dangerosu.
Do you left wing nuts ever think past the first order consequences of anything ?
If she was not stopped – what do you think was going to happen – Flowers bursting out all over ?
“. . . if the driver is armed.”
Which she was. With a 4,000 pound deadly weapon.
Ross trained to kill people and just waited for a chance. He had it and he took it.
Ahead and off to the side and out of the path of the moving car. Then he was alongside and clearly not in danger and fired two more shots at point blank range.
Jonathan Ross identified as ICE agent who shot Renee Good
Star Tribune identifies ICE agent who fatally shot woman in Minneapolis
Jonathan Ross was dragged in a separate incident last year by a fleeing driver, according to court records.
The Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent who fatally shot a 37-year-old woman in Minneapolis on Jan. 7 is Jonathan Ross, the same officer who was dragged and injured by a fleeing driver in a separate incident last year, according to a person with knowledge of the case and verified by court documents.
Little public information is available about Ross, described only by federal officials as “an experienced” officer with more than 10 years at ICE. It’s not immediately clear which field office Ross is based out of.
On Wednesday morning, Ross was embedded with a group of federal agents on a targeted crackdown in south Minneapolis when Renee Nicole Good was shot. A photo of Ross’ face has since circulated on social media, as online sleuths have attempted to identify him.
ICE declined to verify his name when reached for comment on this story.
“He acted according to his training,” Tricia McLaughlin, assistant secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, told the Minnesota Star Tribune in an email, noting that this specific agent was selected for ICE’s Special Response Team, is an expert marksman and “has been serving his country his entire life.”
She claimed that agents have endured a massive surge in assaults and death threats as they conduct their duties.
“The Star Tribune should be absolutely ashamed of themselves for their reckless behavior, and they should delete their story immediately,” she said.
On June 17, Ross was participating in an arrest of Roberto Carlos Munoz-Guatemala, a Mexican citizen, in Bloomington last year. Munoz-Guatemala had previously been convicted of fourth-degree criminal sexual conduct and had been put on a detainer by immigration officials. Munoz-Guatemala ignored the agents’ commands, including to fully roll down his car window, so Ross broke open his rear window and reached inside to unlock the door.
Munoz-Guatemala put the vehicle in drive and accelerated onto the curb, the charges said. Ross was dragged alongside the vehicle and twice fired his Taser as Munoz-Guatemala wove back and forth “in an apparent attempt to shake” him from the car. About 300 feet down the road, Munoz-Guatemala re-entered the street and the force knocked the officer from the car.
The agent required 20 stitches for a deep cut in his right arm and another 13 stitches in his left hand, according to court documents. A jury convicted Munoz-Guatemala of assaulting a federal officer in December.
Hours after the shooting Wednesday morning, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said the agent involved had “been dragged by a vehicle” in an earlier incident. At the time, she did not provide specific location details.
But she described the unnamed officer as “an experienced” agent who’d been in similar situations before and “followed his training.”
DHS confirmed Thursday that the agent who killed Good was the same officer dragged by a suspect in Bloomington last June. Although Ross was not named in the 13-page indictment of the driver, he is identified in several court records in the case, including photo exhibits from the hospital. He is also listed by name as a witness and in the jury instructions.
A law enforcement source, who is not authorized to speak publicly, confirmed that Ross is the shooter.
By: Liz Sawyer, Andy Mannix and Sarah Nelson – The Minnesota Star Tribune ~ January 8, 2026
startribune.com/ice-agent-who-fatally-shot-woman-in-minneapolis-is-identified/601560214
Who was Renee Nicole Good, the woman killed by ICE?
The woman shot dead by a federal immigration agent in Minneapolis has been identified as Renee Nicole Good, a 37-year-old mother of three who had just moved to the city.
By: Tiffany Wertheimer ~ January 8th 2026
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c1jepdjy256o
EXACTLY WHOSE WIFE WAS SHE?
‘They killed my wife’: Outrage follows fatal ICE shooting of Renee Nicole Good in Minneapolis – By Matt Tracy Posted on January 8, 2026
“An Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent fatally shot a woman in Minneapolis on Jan. 7 during an incident captured in multiple video clips, including one that appeared to show her wife crying in distress, drawing widespread condemnation from elected officials and activists.”
– Gay City News
Re: EXACTLY WHOSE WIFE WAS SHE?
Ms. Good (spouse, partner)
ICE killing of Renee Good leaves son orphaned and former KC neighbors reeling
By: Judy L. Thomas , Nathan Pilling , PJ Green and Eric Adler ~ January 8, 2026
https://www.kansascity.com/news/local/article314252777.html
I think we can all agree that there is something very wrong with the circuitry in the cranial vault when one goes 180 degrees in the wrong direction.
So she’s a lesbian, that explains why she took off lickety split!
✔
“Ross was dragged alongside the vehicle” because he refused to let go of the car. He was Fred Flintstoning his feet a brakes to stop the car.
In other news the courts refused to dismiss the charges against Representative LaMonica in the incident in Newark NJ.
The judge finding that she initiated physical contact with the ICE officers and therefore was not covered by the Speech and Debate clause of the constitution at the time.
This order was by a Biden appointed judge who has rejected several other attempts by Rep. LaMonica to dismiss the charges.
She used her belly as a weapon. That may not have gone over well with the judge.
He may not be able to stomach it…
A deadly weapon…
To those left wing nuts – tht include YOU X who keep ranting about this – more and more video is becoming available of this incident.
The BIG deal is that the Officer seen in most of the video with his han reaching into the SUV is NOT the officer that shot Good.
The Officer who shot Good can not be seen in that Video because he is DIRECTLY in front of the SUV – not beside it.
In SOME video he can be seen AFTER the other officer moves out of the way.
Regardless Good was NOT shot through the drivers side Window, she was shot through the Front windshield by an officer who was directly in front of her SUV and was actually being PUSHED by her SUV along the road has he fired. There is some video now where you can see his leg being twisted backwards as Good Accelerates through his body.
This officer was taken to the hospital and treated for injuries inflicted on him by Good.
Further this is NOT the first time this officer was injured by someone hitting him with a car while performing his duty.
Next – while we do not YET have video of what occured before this shooting.
There is an eye witness interview – a woman who was highly critical of ICE who told reporters that Good was leading a “protest” of several other vehciles, that she had turned her car perpendicular to the road and was preventing ICE agents from getting out of the neighborhood – trapping them with an angry crowd forming. This “witness” repeatedly is asked if Good was obstructing ICE and repeatedly says that she was – saying so as if that is completely acceptable.
And this is the core to this problem – left wing nuts think that this type of behavior is acceptable.
An Obama DHS official cautioned everyone that it was too soon to determine whether this was a justified shooting.
But confirmed that you can not interfere with law enforcement, and that a moving SUV is a deadly weapon.
I have no idea is good intended to kill this ICE agent.
It is hard to tell as “protestors” are constantly talking about hunting down and “killing” ICE agents.
But there have been over 100 incidents in which vehicles have been used to ram ICE agents in the past year.
Finally the Agent who fired the shots not only had a body cam, but was holding a cell phone and recording the entire incident
We have not yet seen his video, but likely will.
There is already enough from newer video from different angles to confirm that Good SUV was IN CONTACT WITH the agent who fired the shots, and was pushing him down the road, and was accelerating when he fired.
There is separate video where you can see the bullet hole in the front windshield of the SUV.
The officer seen in most of the videos to the left of Goods SUV with his arms inside the SUV was NOT the officer who fired the shots.
The Officer who shot Good was directly in front of her.
We do not have video of this – Yet, but given the short period of time, the officer who shot Good must have had is gun Drawn and pointed at Good – at the time she was ordered to exit the car, and BEFORE she accelerated into him.
That means that she likely deliberately drove into an officer with his gun drawn AFTER his gun was pointed at her and AFTER she was ordered to exit the vehicle.
This was “suicide by cop”.
@John Say.
Good concise coverage.
However this was not ‘suicide by cop’.
This was FAFO and she most likely thought she’d clear the officer or he’d move out of her way.
She put the vehicle in reverse… and this is a bit telling. She was more likely trying to flee and the officer who had his hand in the door was attempting to arrest her causing her to panic. Of course we’d never know because she’s dead. (It was a righteous shoot. )
Note that the BBC has some misinformation. Other news sources said she had one kid and was widowed before marrying her wife.
What hasn’t been released was the ICE body cam footage along w what precipitated their reason for exiting their ICE vehicles to confront her.
Reports say she had been harassing them eariler.
The interesting thing… her ‘wife’ was on scene filming the whole thing. If she was in the vehicle at the time of obstruction but not when the officers confronted Good… she could in theory at least be tried for muder in the death of her spouse. The idea is that someone died during the commission of a crime (obstruction) and thus she would be guilty of that death.
I seriously doubt she’ll get charged… of course it would depend on what evidence they uncover during their investigation of the incident.
-G
this is an example of the dangers of being the communal useful idiot. Wifey almost certainly egged her on and you know how important that ‘community acceptance’ is desired by those metaphorically on the ledge. someone would have to be ‘rage injected’ to obstruct law men with guns. wifey should be held responsible for conspiracy to obstruct. Why oh why do those who seem to care so passionately in this insanity never are the ones who go do their insane dirty work. Mayor McFry should be tried as well as the head of the conspiracy to endanger LEO and if he feels so strongly about ICE how come the coward isn’t putting _his_ body between ICE and his beloved illegal criminals? C’mon you politicians, have the couRAGE of your stupid convictions and get out there.
. Waiting for forensics but she was blocking the road and her front wheels were turned into the traffic. She then backed up to clear the roadway presumably. She then turned the wheels to her right and attempted to flee. Her vehicle was surrounded by LEOs at that point.
. To the Maga and conservatives, be as vile as the left in your remarks as follows:
The agent was a marksman. Great headshot!
She was asking for it and she got it.
Yay, another one gone!
She really should be drug tested. Really
Your turn 😏
PS: wait for forensics and stop speculating.
Be safe
Plan A was to block ICE, so she angled the vehicle accordingly, relatively perpendicular in the street. Once apprehended, Plan B was to escape ICE, so she tried the “Y-turn” to reorient to relatively parallel and go straight.
I agree with your analysis. I hadn’t considered the felony murder aspect had her wife been in the car. I’d like to know more about the nature of her being a paid agitator. This is far beyond being part of a rent a mob. Whoever paid her, and I have to assume she was being paid to be there, could be charged as an accessory to this.
@Anon,
Not sure if she was a paid agitator.
She was definitely an extreme leftist. Already the MSM has done background checks and it seems she moved to CAN to ‘escape’ Trump… but she moved back and settled in MN. Her son went to a far left libtard school of ‘social justice’.
And that would be a stretch.
The felony murder would apply if there is evidence that while she was harassing ICE, the wife was in the car. So all of the actions would be joined.
I don’t know if they would go that far. Maybe if Minn decides to charge the ICE officer.
-G
Where are the job openings posted for paid agitator? Where is the money trail?
Charlie Kirk was a paid agitator – took in $80 Million a year to stir up college campuses.
I don’t know. Probably a better question for the DOJ. Money trails are very easy to follow, if you are interested in looking. You have to be highly trained to live without a financial paper trail. If she was able to do that, it would be even more suspicious. How did this woman make a living? Who was paying her and her spouse to live in MN? If someone paid Good to use her vehicle, along with other vehicles, to block the road so as to impede ICE, that would make them an accessory to this entire crime. If she was merely part of a volunteer group, they could still be co-conspirators for any of the crimes coming out of this. This was not just a first amendment protected, rent-a-mob.
Yes, offering a rebuttal in an open forum to discuss the issues is stirring up trouble. The only trouble Charlie stirred up was in the indoctrination of our youth by the left wing academia. We can’t have that now can we?!
“However this was not ‘suicide by cop’.”
Did good intend to die ? Probably not
But when you drive your vehicle into someone with a gun pointed at you – you know or should know you are likely to be dead.
While many of the other details contribute to the assessment that she was reckless and dangerous,
The fact that she was driving AT an officer whow gun was drawn is alone sufficient to justify this – everything else is extra.
Yes she was attempting to flee. Officers CAN shoot someone who is trying to flee – if they are dangerous – Good clearly was.
She does NOT have to be a dnger to a specific person at the instant the trigger on the fatal buller isi pulled.
She just needs to be recklessly fleeing without regard for human life – which she was.
Flight Plus reclkless endangerment justifies the shot – flight alone does not.
The personal information is interesting – if correct – but not relevant.
-G
She didn’t drive the car into him. She had the wheels turned hard to the side and made no contact with the murderer. She may not have seen him what with the other agent trying to grab her from the side, but she clearly avoided contact.
Good was less dangerous than a PTSD addled agent with a history of poor decision making regarding vehicles.
What history of poor decisions are taking about? The one where another lunatic dragged him 100yrd with their car 8 months ago? I’m sure the direction here wheels were turned will make all the difference. Oh wait, no it won’t.
Wait … there was a crowd forming? Then there should be a ton of the crowds video? So how do you know what happened? The feds cut out bca investigators. Are you a fed fed fed fed fed…..?
Is someone telling you what they want the video to show? Nothing you said is true.