Below is my column in The Hill on the refusal of many to consider all of the facts in the shooting of Renee Good in Minneapolis. The myopic analysis of press and pundits shows how the tragedy is being weaponized for political purposes.
Here is the column:
In a famous Indian parable, five blind men are brought to an elephant. Each feels a different part of the animal, and they come to radically different views of what an elephant is. It depended on which parts they touched, from tusk to tail.
The controversy over the shooting of Renee Nicole Good, 37, is a type of political elephant parable. People focus on only certain parts of the story to support what they want the case to mean.
Critics and supporters of the responsible officer have slowed down videotapes that last, in critical part, for only a few seconds.
The only difference is that, in this modern parable, many are just willfully blind, choosing not to see beyond their own rage.
This week, Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey (D) became the personification of rage, spewing profanities about ICE while declaring, shortly after the shooting, that the ICE officer was a murderer.
After immediately declaring the officer’s guilt, Frey spent day two lambasting the federal government for rushing to conclusions and demanding that his people play a role in the investigation.
As for his unhinged, profane diatribe, Frey mocked critics if he “offended their Disney princess ears.”
Frey fulfilled the parable most clearly in his use of statistics. He declared that fifty percent of shootings in the city this year were committed by ICE. He then later admitted that, since it was only Jan. 9, there had been only two shootings. Indeed, he could have argued that ICE was responsible for 100 percent of the shootings in the city on Jan. 7.
Again, the trick is to examine the smallest part of the animal and extrapolate to draw sweeping conclusions.
The recently released videotape from the responsible officer also shows how people will focus on insular elements rather than the “totality of the circumstances,” the standard for such cases established by the Supreme Court.
For example, many supporters of the officer are citing the obstruction and taunting by Good and her wife, who were reportedly working with an anti-ICE group. At one point, Becca Good dares the officer to do something as they blocked the road, telling the officer “Do you want to come at us? I say go and get yourself some lunch, big boy.”
For critics, they have focused on Renee Good’s last words: “That’s fine dude, I’m not mad at you, I’m not mad at any of you.” Whether Good was being peaceful or passive-aggressive, others are clearly very, very mad. They are using her statement to push protesters to the brink of violence.
Democratic leaders declared ICE to be “terrorists” and called for mass protests in the very same city that burned in 2020 after the George Floyd riots. Right on cue, one Black Lives Matter leader suggested that the prosecution of officers in the George Floyd case only occurred because protesters burned down the city. She told protesters to ignore pleas not to do it again. “Let me tell you this. We need justice and we need it now.”
Protesters in other cities chanted “Kristi Noem will hang” and “Save a Life, Kill an ICE.”
In the same presser where he condemned federal officials for jumping to conclusions, Frey not only reaffirmed that Good had been murdered but added that the officer was not actually injured as claimed. “The ICE agent walked away with a hip injury that he might as well have gotten from closing a refrigerator door with his hips,” he said. “He was not injured. Give me a break. No, he was not ran over. He walked out of there with a hop in his step.”
Few of us have been in Frey’s kitchen, but the latest videotape seems to show something more intense than an encounter with his fridge. The video shows the agent being hit by the vehicle as Good ignores orders to get out of the car, as Becca Good is screaming, “drive, drive, drive.”
Reasonable people can disagree on whether the officer should have discharged his weapon. Flight alone is not grounds for the use of lethal force. However, Good’s actions could also be interpreted as an intentional endangerment of the officer.
At a minimum, it was clearly reckless, as another officer was trying to reach into the vehicle and Good refused to yield to the effort to place her into custody. The Goods forced the confrontation, and Renee Good then escalated the level of danger by speeding toward an officer.
This is why the legal standard requires you to take in the entire elephant, not just insular parts.
While there may still be countervailing facts emerging from the investigation, the governing legal standard clearly favors the officer. It is Good’s actions, not her motivations, that are critical to determining whether excessive force was used. The officer’s cellphone video shows he had a fraction of a second to decide and fired after being struck by the car. (The same officer had been seriously hurt previously after being dragged by a car.)
The Justice Department’s guidances incorporate the standards outlined in past Supreme Court decisions, such as Graham v. Connor (1989). Again, individual elements can be viewed in isolation as favoring or disfavoring the use of force, including the severity of the crime at issue (in this case likely a misdemeanor) and whether the suspect was “attempting to evade arrest by flight.” The guidelines stress that “[t]he ‘reasonableness’ of a particular use of force must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, rather than with the 20/20 vision of hindsight.”
This tragedy shows that people watching the same videotapes can come to diametrically opposed conclusions. Take the speed of the vehicle. Some have noted that the car was traveling less than 10 miles per hour before it collided with another vehicle. However, the speed after the shooting of Good is immaterial. The relevant question is the distance and speed with reference to the officer. It was clearly speeding up and immediately struck the officer before Good was shot.
The same is true of those who note how the wheels appear to be turning toward or away from the officer. The fact is, Good struck the officer. That does not mean she intended to do so, but that does not matter. From the officer’s perspective, Good was ignoring orders while speeding toward him from just feet away.
There will likely be civil litigation. Democrats have also called for criminal charges. The arguments on both sides of this controversy show, at most, that the issue is debatable. The officer could be viewed as wrong and still be found to have acted within the scope of his discretion in responding to a threat. Any state effort to charge the officer will be removed to federal court, where he will likely have immunity based on this evidence.
The public would be wise to ignore conclusions reached blindly by either side. In an “Age of Rage,” we live in the land of the blind, where the one-eyed man is king. The public must remain clear-eyed and calm as the investigation proceeds in Minneapolis.
Jonathan Turley is a law professor and the author of the forthcoming “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution.”
When that officer, who was doing his job, instructed her what do and she did not comply, it was done in an environment of high tension. This was not the kind of compliance where an officer tells you to get out of the car and you delay. They’re not pulling a gun out and blowing you away. No, this was a situation where there was a threat of bodily harm to the officer. He had to shoot. RIP Ashley Babbitt.
The Left makes the type of argument that gets people killed. Law enforcement ordered Good to get out of her car. To which the Left replies:
“Good had no reason to exit the vehicle.” (Followed by arguments about why the officer’s order was not legal.)
Those are potentially good arguments to make — *after* you have obeyed the officer’s orders, and days later when you are sitting with your attorney across the table from a prosecutor.
The Left needs to watch more “Law & Order:”
“In the criminal justice system, the people are represented by two separate yet equally important groups: the police who investigate crime and the district attorneys who prosecute the offenders. These are their stories.”
When you conflate the latter with the former, you don’t live to tell your story.
More than this: In most states it is a crime to resist arrest even if the arrest is unlawful. When a policeman tells you to get out of the car, or to turn around and submit to arrest, you are required to obey and if you don’t that itself is a crime for which you can be prosecuted even if you can prove that the cop was in the wrong. The moment you resist you are in the wrong.
You are “detained” when the officer turns on the flashing lights.
You are not “free to go” until he says so.
excellent
“. . . the ‘totality of the circumstances,’ the standard for such cases established by the Supreme Court.” (JT)
And more importantly, that standard is a principle of logic: “The truth is the whole.”
When you omit elements of that whole, you commit an egregious fallacy: dropping the context. When you do so habitually, as the Left does to push a “narrative,” you are a pathologically dishonest. You are a propagandist — not a seeker of the truth.
That pathological dishonesty is why MN officials cannot be trusted to be part of the investigation.
The left tells us they are Peaceful
Want to bet.
___________________________
A left-wing TikTok user urged his followers to “get violent” and to “kill” United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents in a video that rapidly spread across social media Monday.
Let me mention a quaint concept: “Disturbing the peace.”
There are videos that show the broader context of what was going on at the time, drivers blowing horns, people blowing whistles, sirens going off.
This is not reasoned debate.
This is an attempt to intimidate the ICE agents, indeed, an assault on their sanity.
I think people should be disgusted at these cheap, vulgar, tactics.
Here is the three-minute video (pardon the lead-in ad)
https://www.foxnews.com/us/new-video-shows-minutes-leading-up-deadly-minneapolis-ice-shooting
Agreed but generally an LEO is not going to try to make a case on issues that are also free speech.
Blocking the road – even partly, is obstruction. There is no free speech defense.
Renee Good’s Minnesota ‘ICE Watch’ Group Promoted Manual Teaching Assault on Law Enforcement, Calls De-Arrests a ‘Micro-Intifada’
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2026/01/renee-goods-minnesota-ice-watch-group-promoted-manual/
The guide, posted on their Instagram account in June, states that every de-arrest is a “micro-intifada,” and provides step-by-step advice on confronting and assaulting officers.
Minnesota ICE Watch, described as a “loose collective of agitators,” focuses on documenting and resisting federal immigration enforcement, including ICE agents. The group operates under the banner of an “autonomous collective documenting & resisting against ICE, police, & all colonial militarized regimes,” as stated on their Instagram profile.
Good, a 37-year-old member of the group, was fatally shot by an ICE agent on January 7, while attempting to mow him down with her vehicle.
According to a report from the New York Post, neighbors say Good attended regular meetings and received “thorough training” from ICE Watch.
The ‘truth is this is an organized and well funded insurrection against the United States of America. They want a socialist paradise.
Everyone involved in publishing and distributing that manual, or who participated in the training, should be charged with criminal conspiracy. They are all in agreement to perform an illegal act, and at least one of them has taken a concrete action in furtherance of the conspiracy, so they’re all guilty.
Of course but no one is doing that. It’s a 4th grade classroom.
Sorry but no – that would actually violate free speech.
Brandenburg V Ohio is the major case on this.
You can instruct people on how to break the law – without the direct connection – and without immediacy it is still free speech.
John, Brandenburg is not on point here, because there is an actual conspiracy. The publishers and distributors of the manual are not merely advocating crime, they are themselves conspiring to commit it. And conspiracy is one of the exceptions to the freedom of speech, since it’s crime facilitating speech. It’s not necessary that each person in the conspiracy plans to personally participate in the actual crime; all that’s needed is an agreement between all of them that the crime should be committed, combined with an overt action (printing the manual is enough) by at least one member of the conspiracy.
Also, even under Brandenburg, the speech is both intended and likely to produce criminal action, so the only element to be proved is imminence. What exactly is the typical time gap between handing someone the manual and them following its instructions? How long would be too long for Brandenburg?
Documenting is legal.
Protesting is legal.
Resisting is not.
DeArresting is not.
Democrats\liberals hate facts. They are useless for propaganda. Lies work much better.
Glance at MSM coverage and it is obvious Good’s case is used to foment riots across the US. MSM openly advertise places and times of “spontaneous” “protests” even when there is no official organized management (see No Kings theater). And you got to love those pre-printed and recycled signs.
Nice try Soros.
‘Disgusting’: Same professional protester allegedly found at nearly 100 different protests
https://www.wnd.com/2026/01/disgusting-same-professional-protester-allegedly-found-nearly-100/
Dominic Alvieri, a cybersecurity analyst in Philadelphia, reacted to the video, saying: “Many paid protesters are paid TAX FREE.”
“Paid protestors are even advertised on several mainstream platforms like Indeed and ZipRecruiter (usually taxed) and have several job types. Finding them now requires more granular search using different keywords. Rise and Resist is still active but you’re right about ActBlue.”
When Ingraham asked the protester if she had a job, the woman exclaimed, “I’m getting paid right now!”
Here are the pay scales for protesters. You liberal trolls here are wasting your time, you could be making big bucks protesting instead.
https://www.wnd.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/ziprecruiter-paid-agtator-professional-protesters.jpg
Renee Good was also a part time traffic officer blocking the street for good of humanity. Not to mention an insurance fraud. Notice her Missouri license plates.
What About Freeway Chases?
The modern freeway chase goes back most of our lives. There are literally thousand of cases from the past 50 years where police have patiently chased a fleeing motorist rather than assassinate.
And that became a question in the early days of freeway chases. The argument went that a fleeing motorist had weaponized their car and shooting them was possibly justified.
But it was widely felt that a dead motorist posed an even greater threat than a fleeing motorist. So patiently pursuing became accepted practice.
What’s more, the courts have never wanted cops to have an abundance of leeway with regards to shooting suspects. Instead the courts have wanted to keep that bar high.
We’ve all seen that movie where a dirty cop or sheriff shoots someone in the back and claims they were fleeing.
For that reason the public doesn’t want cops having too many reasons for pulling the trigger.
Therefore the Trump Justice Department had better think twice before excusing Johnathan Ross. To rule that shooting is justified would basically overturn 50 years of precedent.
ATS
This si a legal blog where you – without credibility make calims about past unnamed and uncited cases.
Not persuasive.
Regardless. It is correct and SCOTUS has ruled that way more recently that fleeing ALONE is not sufficient to justify the shooting of someone fleeing in a motor vehicle.
That is not the situation here. Nor the situation in any of the instance in which ICE agents have been rammed.
Good was fleeing in a 2TON weapon – and even the MN courts treat a car as a deadly weapon,
and she was either intentionally or recklessly an immediate threat of harm to atleast two ICE agents.
There is no 50 year rule being violated.
DOJ is not going to prosecute the ICE agent that shot Good – because he is innocent.
MN is aparently trying to do so, but they will fail. If they manage to file a state case it will be transfered to the federal courts
and then dismissed as federal LEOs are immune from prosecution under State laws.
Regardless, courts rule based on laws – you cite none, and they speak through holdings in cases and you provide none.
The case of the FBI sniper who came onto Randi Weavers property without a warrant and murdered his family would be something you should familiarize yourself with.
The facts are far more clear and far more egregious, and the agent could not be prosecuted by state courts.
John Say continues to lie to maintain the false narrative, gaslighting Good.
She was leaving as she had been told to. Ross had no business being in front of her car, period. ICE policy and training specifically point out that officers are not to stand in front of vehicles to prevent them from leaving.
Ross was wearing body armor, which makes any claim of injury minimal to non-existent. That he went to the hospital is not proof of injury; more likely, it’s proof of standard procedure. He got checked out and was sent on his merry way.
Good was neither intentionally nor recklessly in her attempt to leave. It has already been established that Ross was out of danger the moment he side-stepped to the driver’s side when he made the second and third shots. John Say’s blatant exaggerations and disingenuous narrative are part of the problem. Secretary Noem blatantly lied just an hour after the shooting, and various DHS officials proceeded to gaslight her and smear her name. That seems to be standard procedure whenever ICE or DHS makes a grave mistake. Rather than own up to their mistakes and be held accountable, they lie and gaslight victims of ICE’s aggressiveness and unlawful conduct.
Blah blah blah blah…X dude not worthy of reading……. it’s screed.
You are wrong. Video and official statements show the ICE agent approached Good’s SUV and gave commands before the vehicle moved. The shots occurred when the SUV moved while an officer was nearby. There is no verified evidence that Good was simply observing or that ICE deliberately hid facts or “gaslighted” anyone. Claims about intentional deception or wrongdoing are unsupported by the available evidence.
“She was leaving as she had been told to. ”
The last direction she received from an LEO was “Get Out of the F$%King car”
The was loosely surrunded by ICE vehciles with red and blue falshing lights.
She was absolutely positively NOT “free to go”
I have seen no audio of any ICE officer from the time she placed her car where it was before she stuck the officer who directed her to leave.
An ICE officer had his hands in her Vehicle and another was in front of her vehicle
She was absolutely NOT “free to go”
You are just Crazy lying.
While this was not a traffic stop – even at the absolutely lowest level of potential offence – a tail light out – she was in the midst of a “terry stop” – a “terry stop” is a custodial investigation. You are NOT “Free to go”.
Those of you on the left spouting this nonsense are not only spreading very bad legal advice that can get other ICE protestors killed,
But your advice is so bad and dangerous that it could get plenty of people killed at simple traffic stops if they buy your ignorant nonsense.
Good was by MULTIPLE measures OBVIOUSLY being detained.
Any effort to leave would be “resisting arrest” – a far more serious offence thant anything that started this or a trafic stop.
Next – Not Just Good – but ANYONE who moves their vehicle while a Police officer is immediately adjacent to it – in this case with both hands in the vehicle, but even if he did not, would be guilty of agrevated assault.
You can rant and rave – but THAT IS THE LAW – I do not personally agree with that law. But we have by law upgraded the tiniest unwanted actions involving an LEO to agrevated assault – which is a VERY serious crime and can easily result in DECADES of jail time.
And no matter what WILL result in YEARS or jail time.
Quit spreading this IDIOTIC and DANGEROUS advice.
If you are being detained by a police officer – if you even think you MIGHT be detained by a police officer.
If you are NOT detained by a police officer – and you are given an order FOLLOW IT.
If you have an issue – take it up later – if you are charged – take it up with the magistrate.
If you are not charged – sue.
In the real world – If Renee Good had lived she was facing MANY years in a federal prison.
ABSOULTELY DO NOT listen to the idiotic claims of X and other left wing nuts on this board regarding interactions with Law enforcement
unless you are seeking to spend a long time in prison.
If you wish to debate whether that is what the law SHOULD be – fine – I am not happy with the absolutely draconian penalties that can result from MINOR scuffles with the police.
But DO NOT ruin your life in a test of wills with a police officer.
X is Lying and if you believe what he says and act accordingly the consequences for you – Like Renee Good
“Ross had no business being in front of her car, period. ICE policy and training specifically point out that officers are not to stand in front of vehicles to prevent them from leaving.”
Then you will be able to point to the FULL policy including ALL exceptions.
There is no policy regarding stationary vehicles, and even the moving vehicle policy has a large number of exceptions that apply here.
Regardless I do not want idiotic blanket claims by Ilhan Omar, I do not want faux legal experts or articles in WaPo or NYT.
You want to be beleived – provide the ACTUAL policy in its entirety.
Otherwise you are stuck wearing the Liar Epitaph that YOU have hung arround your neck like a boat anchor.
Why do I KNOW you are wrong – because REAL LAWYERS – the acknowdged experts in the laws regarding the use of deadly force and police stops contradict you.
But equally important because of something called LOGIC and REASON.
While there are occasions that the law is STUPID, they are not common. Even when the Law is unconstitutional or excessive, it is rarely completely illogical.
There will be no policies regarding Law enforcement interactions that create a “get out of jail free” scenario.
There are also no polices regarding law enforcement interactions that are going to make things WORSE and Harder rather than better.
A Massive portion of arrests in this country occur as a result of police vehicle stops.
This is why the courts have been reluctant to significantly narrow the power of LEO in relatively trivial traffic stops for inconsequential offenses.
Traffic stops are where the police normally enforce outstanding warrants as an example.
I do not personally agree with the SCOTUS ruling that the police can order you out of your car.
But that is the law as SCOTUS has decided it. You do NOT have the right to refuse to obey the order of an LEO,
and even if you think it is unlawful and you are correct – you do NOT get to debate that on the scene.
Your opportunity to address the lawfulness of an order by an LEO is in court. NOWHERE ELSE.
I have seen cases where a tenant in an apartment building went to jail for obstructing police – who did not have a warrant from entering the common areas of the apartment building. The Tenant was NOT obligated to unlock the foor to allow the officers in – they had no warrant.
But once he unlocked the door and opened it a crack to ask if they had a warrant, he lost the ability to stop them from entering and attempting to do so was deemed obstruction and he went to jail for it.
Do I like that ? Absolutely not – but it is the law.
If you do not like it CHANGE IT.
In many cases I will support you.
Regardless as I said Traffic stops are the primary means by which police arrest Criminals.
Which is why there are massive amounts of law and cases arround traffic stops.
And why that law massively favors LEOs.
The courts nor the law nor policies are going to throw a roadblock to the potential arrest of a criminal.
Despite the fact that the overwhelming majority of traffic stops do not involve criminals.
We do not have all the interactiosn between good and the officer at her window.
But it is near certain that:
If her car was running she was ordered to turn it off.
If it was stopped and she started it and the officer had time to do so – he ordered her to turn it off.
You are playing games over whether Good could drive into the officer.
Go find the directions for dealing with a police stop.
TURN YOUR CAR OFF.
KEEP YOUR HANDS ON THE WHEEL.
Do NOT do anything that the officer does not direct you to do.
Do not open your glove box
Do not reach under the seat
Do not move arround in the car.
Traffic stops are deadly serious – Most of the police deaths in the US each year occur at Traffic stops.
Most Police shootings of others occur at Traffic stops.
Reach into your glove box to retrieve your insurance and if the officer thinks you are going to a gun you could have you head blown off.
And it could easily be reported as a justified shooting.
You may not like the Good Shooting,
but it was not only lawful – it was not even a close call.
We do not like it when people we do not think of as criminals – women with children get killed in a police stop,
but that does not change the law.
Two Tda members in Portland were shot while trying to run down a CBP agent yet that has been a blip on the news – We do not hear
thousands of left wing nuts in cacophony threatening to suceed fromt he union over that.
Why ? Because it turned out they really were Tda. Even the Portland cheif of police had to admit that weepingly.
If Good had turned out to be Tda or Antia – you might still be here posting – telling us all antifa is not real.
But most defending good would be quiet.
But the Two Tda members were not shot because they were Tda. They were shot because they tried to run down a CBP agent much like Good did.
The use of deadly force does not become justified because of things we learn later.
It is also not unjustified because of things we did not learn later.
“Ross was wearing body armor, which makes any claim of injury minimal to non-existent.”
Not True and not relevant.
“That he went to the hospital is not proof of injury; more likely, it’s proof of standard procedure.”
Possibly -0 When an officer is struck by a vehicle.
Whether The officer was struck or not does not alter whether the shooting is justified.
Whether the officer is injured or not does not alter whether the shooting was justified.
To Justify the shooting there must be a RISK of death or serious bodily injury to yourself or others.
The Key word is RISK.
“Good was neither intentionally nor recklessly in her attempt to leave.”
Of course she was – she struck the officer and she did so with another officer reaching into her vehicle.
That is prima fascia reckless endangerment.
“It has already been established that Ross was out of danger the moment he side-stepped to the driver’s side when he made the second and third shots. ”
It is standard procedure for police to fire multiple shots if they fire at all. A single shot rarely stops the wrong doer.
Once the first shot is justified – the rest are.
We do not split hairs by microseconds on police shooting.
“John Say’s blatant exaggerations and disingenuous narrative are part of the problem.”
Not a “narative”
The facts and the law.
“Secretary Noem blatantly lied just an hour after the shooting”
Not true and not relevant.
You constantly pretend that completely extraneous matters in some time warp affect the legitimacy of past actions.
“and various DHS officials proceeded to gaslight her and smear her name. That seems to be standard procedure whenever ICE or DHS makes a grave mistake.”
It has been common place for over a decade for law enforcement to respond RAPIDLY to cases like this.
The George Floyd riots are an example of why.
False narratives like your get out and we can have police stations burned and myriads of people dead.
This is also why Body cam video is being rapidly released nowadays when it often took weeks in the past.
Near Universally Law enforcement strives to GET AHEAD of police involved stories as rapidly as possible.
Because lies like yours so often are taken as truth by many and once locked in can not be dislodged by the turth.
The norm 2 decades ago was to go slow and cautiously and tell people to wait for all the facts.
But left wing nuts refuse to do that.
And will start buring thiings down and rioting quickly
I would note the officer had a cell phone he was taking pictures for EXACTLY this type of event.
He did not have a body cam – Why ? Necause Bidens 2025 Budget did not allocate money for Body cams for ICE.
ICE agents are getting Body Cams as the 2026 Budget monies become available.
” Rather than own up to their mistakes and be held accountable, they lie and gaslight victims of ICE’s aggressiveness and unlawful conduct.”
LEOs are agressive – AGAIN Government is FORCE. You keep missing that.
Rene is dead – she can not be gaslit.
And the only one gaslighting you – is you.
In a case like this it will ALWAYs be possible to 2nd guess what was done.
The ICE officers are probably kicking themselves for not blocking Goods exit with a vehicle as an example.
But you keep talking about ICE mistakes. That is not how it works.
It is Rene Goods choices that resulted in her death.
LEOs are NOT obligated to perform their job in the way that results in the least possibel immediate potential harm if the person being detained makes bad choices.
Even if X were, for a wonder, right about the policy, A POLICY IS JUST THAT. It is not a law. If an officer violates policy by getting in front of a moving car, he has not broken any law, and is still entitled to use deadly force to defend himself.
Ano
Yeah good luck on that one. She made a bad choice.
Some simple words to think about before doing stupid stuff
( Don’t let your emotions dictate your actions)
This will blow over. Floyd blew over. What’s under the rage lasts and deepens and erupts over and over and we can’t tame that molten rock. One day, soon, it will explode all over us and we will beg GOD for his help. Like the atheist/agnostic screaming at the top of her lungs for GOD as her jetliner plunges to the ground, it is too late–for the plane. Not for her. How she will long for one more chance to do the things she should have done. Love your neighbor, and GOD
I beleive this has mostly blown over already.
While the left has managed to bring out protestors – not nearly in the numbers they got for floyd.
Further these protestors are being arrested and prosecuted federally when they move from protest to violence.
ICE arresting violent illegals has brought crime down dramatically.
ICE arresting violent protestors will over the long run bring violent protests and interferance with ICE down.
What is a shame is that Walz and Frey are sacrificing members of their own political base for very little political gain.
ICE is arresting people for having the audacity to film them in public. The majority of these arrests and the charges against them are usually dismissed. ICE is making things worse for itself.
ICE is intentionally assaulting protesters to justify arrests. They don’t like the full attention, the increased difficulty, and the damage to their reputation.
ICE is committing crime to prevent crime. How ironic.
X goes derp derp ad nauseum !.
ICE arrests are based on federal law, not opinion. Officers act under statutes like the Immigration and Nationality Act, with probable cause and legal authority. Claims that arrests are for filming or to justify abuse are unfounded. Saying otherwise lacks intelligence.
“The fact is, Good struck the officer.”
Show that video.
Not only is there no proof of that happening, there is video evidence that there remained a gap between the officer and the vehicle and that the officer was going for his gun before the vehicle moved while, at the same time, putting himself in a shooting position. One video is from the killer was recording on his own phone, his own perspective on the situation.
Courts have found that one cannot claim self-defense for intentionally putting oneself into an endangering situation.
We all saw the same aspects of the same elephant. The divide is that some think that the elephant should be encouraged and supported in their killing over being irritated and others think that killing for annoyance should not be rewarded with commendation and adulation.
Here’s hoping the pay for the alternative facts is enough to make up for selling your spine, Jonathan.
“Courts have found that one cannot claim self-defense for intentionally putting oneself into an endangering situation.”
“We sleep safely at night because rough men stand ready to visit violence on those who would harm us.” — Churchill
Only rarely and never with regard to law enforcement.
It is the duty of law enforcement to place themselves in dangerous situations in order to protect the rest of us.
It is litterally their job. Arresting criminals is DANGEROUS.
As we see – even arresting a women for obstructing law enforcement is dangerous.
Recklessly or intentionally Good put other people in fear for their life or bodily harm
She did so in the midst of fleeing from arrest.
At every step in this encounter Good escalated. Going from legitimate protest, to unlawful obstruction to failure to obey to resisting arrest to reckless endangerment to dead
This is tragic. But it is the natural conseuence of the ideology and tactics of the left.
ATS – multiple videos show the officer being struck – though that is not critical. All that is necescary is that the officer had a reasonable fear of death or serious harm to himself or others.
Good fleeing with the Other officer attempting to remove her from the vehicle is sufficient.
Regardless EVERY video shows The officer being struck in some form.
Two from the front – one grainy and one more clear show the impact showing the officer to the side hard.
The officers own video does not show him being tossed – it shows how he lost control of his own body as he was hit.
The video from behind shows the officers feet – before and after being hit and these have been significantly shifted in a fraction of a second.
But you are free to disbeleive your own eyes – those of you on the left are very good at self delusion and disconnect from reality.
All of us are unhappy about Goods death. her lawless actions did not warrant the death penalty.
But she did not give the ICE officer any choices. She forced him to choose the safety of himself and others over her life.
SHE did that. You do not get to blame law enforcement for enforcing the law.
If you are upset with ICE raids and immigration law – go to congress and try to change the law.
That is how “democracy” works.
The rule of law – rather than anarchy reuires that we enforce the laws we have rather than those some of us wish we had.
Those of you on the left are trying to ignore out of existance decades of immigration law as well as centuries of law on the justified use of deadly force.
The law we have is never perfect – but it is fat better than just tossing it on a whim and manufacturing new law from scratch.
It is also extremely hypocritical. If only Alishi Babbit was threatening Officer Byrd with an SUV – the left would be claiming her death as a murder and tragedy – NOT!
The law is blind to our politics, or race, our gender. It is based on the facts.
The ICE officer was defending himself and others against a dangerous and reckless woman wielding a 2ton deadly weapon.
Ofc. Byrd was not defending anyone and not threatened. He murdered Babbit over politics.
Wrong
More than one video and angles, show she hit him. She should have listened to the office and not her girl friend, (drive baby drive)
You did not see the body cam ?. Blinders on huh. Typical lefto fascist.
“Courts have found that one cannot claim self-defense for intentionally putting oneself into an endangering situation.”
Which of course is a lie.
I intentionally stop a thug from beating up an elderly person. The thug comes at me with a knife. I shoot him. Textbook self defense.
Substitute a knife for a 4,000 pound weapon, and the officer’s shooting was righteous.
Coming to ABC this fall, a trigger happy ICE agent meets an entitled Karen on an icy Minnesota street…
I was waiting for some dumbkof to refer to officer Ross’s murder victim as a “Karen”. Didn’t take long.
It’s “dummkopf”, dummkopf.
Ein linker hat scheisse im Gesicht !!!!!!
Of course she is a Karen – as are the rest of you priviledged idiots actually obstructing the lawful arrests of illegal aliens many of whom are murders rapists and pedophiles.
Do not behave stupid – do NOT interfere with ANY LEOs performance of their duty.
If you think they are acting lawlessly – observe record and address the conduct in court later.
When you interfere YOU become the criminal, worse you do not know the facts and you may well be aiding a violent criminal.
Don’t be stupid.
Regarless – while not near the George Floyd levels – idiot mayors and governors – probably to distract from their own failures are rallying protestors to go to war with ICE.
The MN police are standing down – because they have been ordered to – there is little doubt they would protect other LEOs in a conflict. ICE has surged several thousand additional officers to Minneapolis.
We have already seen 20 violent protestors arrested.
Obstructing ICE went badly for Judge Dugan do you really think it will go better for violent protestors.
Lets be clear – Obstruct police officers and you are likely to be arrested. prosecuted and punished accordingly.
You get to decide what the law should be through your congressmen. Not through violence and intimidation of police on the streets.
The War between so-called “law enforcement” and US citizens has begun.
ATS
Lots of left wing looneys saying stupid things is not the start of a war.
In the US if you enter the US anywhere but a port of entry – that is illegal.
If you are not a citizen you may not enter without permission.
That is true in every country in the world.
CBP and ICE are tasked to enforce those laws.
They are actual law enforcement – not “so called”.
If you do not like the law – go to congress and try to get it changed.
While you are free to protest saying whatever stupidity you wish, you are not free to interfere with law enforcement.
You can not interfere with a traffic stop,
you can not interfere with an arrest.
Even if you beleive an order From an LEO is illegal – you must obey it.
You can challenge the legality later in court.
All of he above are the social contract – the rule of law.
They are the difference between ordered liberty and anarchy.
I agree entirely with you. I see the Minnesota mob as the aggressor against ICE, who is risking life and limb to protect you, me, and everyone else, including people like the Goods. It’s the mob that’s against the people; ICE is on the side of the people. It mystifies me that the mob appears to be predominantly white women, white the perpetrators ICE is seeking are mainly male people of color. On would think most of their victims are women, children, and people of color. Are the women of the mob self-hating? Are they racist?
ICE has killed 10 people in the new year. Zero ICE agents have even been injured. ICE agents are risking nothing.
ICE has been arresting US citizens who are male people of color. Why would they feel safe now that white women are getting shot in the head and their brains blown out?
WHY have 10 people been killed.
WHAT did they do, because I’m sure ICE didn’t just walk up to them and kill them.
No ICE has not killed 10 people. Hundreds of ICE agents have been injured – some severely,
And atleast two NG as well as several illegal immigrants have been murdered by the lefts idiotic and lawless interferance with the enforcement of the law.
If you do not like the law – go to congress to get it changed.
I have said here OVER AND OVER – government is FORCE. Ultimately is is LETHAL FORCE.
Every single law will ultimately be enforced by a man with a gun who will kill you if you resist or take your property or liberty if you do not.
Government MUST use FORCE to enforce the law – if the law is not enforced – it does not exist and we have anarchy.
LEOs swear to uphold the law – with FORCE if necescary – there is no exception for laws they do not like
If you violate the law – they will use FORCE to arrest you. If you resist, they will use more FORCE.
If you escalate without stopping – you will die.
This is true of immigration law, it is true of laws against selling loose cigarettes (Eric Garner).
If you are unwilling to kill people to enforce the law – do not pass that law.
Those of you on the left LOVE passing laws to control others.
To make them conform to your whims.
All those laws are ultimately enforced by men with guns who will kill you if you do not comply.
If we do not enforce our laws, if we reuire Law enforcement to back down at some point.
Then we are lawless. Everyone will know that if they escalate far enough they will get away with whatever they want.
The result is anarachy. And that is exactly what we see when the left takes control.
Post the truth of it’s a lie.
Typical of the left
BG
You are addressing two independent issues.
The first is the law.
The 2nd is morality and what should the law be.
My views on immigration are not those of the right or the left.
When I say – go to congress – that does not mean you will succeed.
We do not have the immigration laws I would prefer.
We had a public debate over immigration and other issues through 2024.
The electorate chose Trump’s views.
Even so Trump is not making his own laws out of thin air – as Obama and Biden did.
He is prioritizing the eforcement of existing laws.
Laws that predate his election by decades and were passed by democrats and republicans.
Each of us is different, we have different values and views – though I am very disturbed at how rote homogenous those on the left are.
They talk about MAGA as a cult – while they are ideological clones unable to have an original though or to understand the morality and thics we have spent 7000+ years developing.
I grew up in the 60’s and 70’s I am well aware that the police can be lawless. While I beleive – perhaps naively that they are less corrupt today than in Frank Serpico’s time. I am sure there is corruption within law enforcement.
I fully support actively monitoring law enforcement – keep them under the spotlight.
Like Government as a whole Law enforcement is a necescary evil.
The majority of people will behave morally and ethically without govenrment – IF they are not threatened by the smaller portion of us that will use force against others to get what we want. We have govenrment – because if a significant minority will use force to get their way – ultimately all or nearly all of us must in order to survive.
As Hobbes noted life in nature is nasty, brutish and short.
men need a common power feared by all in order to live at peace
That is the social contract, that is the purpose of government
that is the role of the police.
They are a necescary evil – which is not to say that officers are themselves evil. Some are most aren’t.
Regardless, we need them.
We need laws,
and we need checks on the actions of those with power – including police.
But there is no evidence of consequential corruption within ICE and CBP.
They are not being paid off by illegals and cartels
ICE is not pursuing political enemies.
Contra the left there is little evidence that they are getting off on beating the crap out of people like the LAPD and Rodney King.
They are doing their best to enforce the laws that we have.
SAnd more so than any other form of law enforcement we can change what ICE does by changing the law.
Many of the people being sought entered legally, brought here as children.
What crime did the children commit?
No one is interfering. The ICE agents simply don’t want witnesses to their beating the heads of captives into the pavement.
Yawn.. Again you offer zero proof.
Yet still they are illegal and deportable. And you have an issue with the law huh ?.
And yet when Trump detained the law-breaking parents while turning their blameless children over to state foster care, the Left screamed it was cruel and unfair.
They did NOT enter legally. Being a child at the time simply means they were not responsible for their parents’ crimes, but their entry was still not legal. And once they grew up they had a legal duty to leave the country; remaining here is not a crime, but it’s a violation for which they are subject to arrest, and resisting arrest IS a crime.
And no one’s head is being beaten into the pavement. You’re thinking of Little Saint Trayvon; that was his preferred murder method.
Liberals believe in making laws, but not in enforcing them
They only want to enforce them on the right. They are immune to the laws….
It rages on. Taking less visible breaks now and then. But the pressure builds and builds over time. It never decreases until it blows in such massive destructive fury that opportunities to learn from all these powerful but small quakes will be no more. C.S. Lewis, GOD SHOUTS TO A DEAF AND DYING WORLD. The mounting tragedies are the sounds of His Voice growing louder and louder
A lieberal using God in it’s doublespeak….. hypocrisy at it’s finest.
Only for the law breakers. Much like yourself !
OT: Notice how the left consistently supports those who ultimately wish us gone, yet when ordinary people rise against tyranny, their compassion vanishes. There must be some gene driving this self-destructive pattern.
Iranian protesters are showing courage in the face of tyranny — but Israel-obsessed liberals don’t seem to care
By Melanie Phillips
https://nypost.com/2026/01/11/opinion/iranian-protesters-are-showing-courage-in-the-face-of-tyranny-but-israel-obsessed-liberals-dont-seem-to-care/
LOVE THAT TRUMP RESISTANCE GENE!
It’s closely linked to the Stupidity gene.
Technically diagnosed as T D S , but you knew that.
Today in Minneapolis ICE arrested approx 20 criminal illegal aliens.
The majority were sex offenders. Forced sodomy of children. Rape, multiple murder.
These are the people that the left is protecting.
These are the people Rene Good got herself killed over.
ICE is lying.
Because you say so ? The names of the people arrested and their records are all publicly available.
You have these observer organizations like ICE Watch, instead of Obstructing why don’t they observe report and verify.
Take pictures of those arrested and then look them up to determine if they actually are the people ICE claims they are.
Claiming that others are lying when they are extremely transparent in their actions is just crazy lying and stupid.
Methinks you are the purveyor of multiple lies.
Indeed.
The contemporary version of Professor Turley’s Indian parable is:
5 sighted men see an elephant. The three conservatives in the group call the animal elephant. Upon hearing that, the two Libs in the group call it a rodent…