"I'm not mad at you" Last words said by Renee Good before she was slaughtered by a ICE gestapo agent. It appears the ICE gestapo have been given carte blanche to just kill anyone , The agent was making a video with his camera while he shot the lady in the head , She appeared to be driving away from the shooter at the time . What the hell is the gestapo doing at a peaceful protest anyway. I thought they were suppose to be getting hard core criminals and terrorists . If thats the case they may want to start at the White House.
1: The entire stop was pretextual. ICE does not have authority over traffic or noise ordinances, so the claim was that this was about interference with officers. However, Good's car was only blocking one lane of a two lane one-way street. The officers could have easily driven past, as other cars had done. If the pretext was related to prior interactions they had with Good, they have provided no evidence as to her having violated the law earlier in the day. Thus the encounter from the start was legally dubious, as were any orders the officers may have given.
2: Officer Ross, rather than maintaining tactical and situational awareness, was playing with his phone. Even if recording was necessary for the job (a dubious claim), he was using the wrong tool in the wrong way.
3: Officer Ross blundered in front of Good's running car, then behind it, then in front of it again. The is a gross violation of both basic police training and common sense. Most parents are teaching their pre-schoolers not to do this. Adults have no excuse, doubly so when they are distracted by their phones.
4: When Good started backing up, in a patently obvious attempt to give her room to pass to the right of Officer Ross, Ross suddently stopped, squared up to the vehicle, switched his phone from right to left, drew his gun, leaned towards the car and aimed. In that same amount of time, he could have taken about three steps to the left, the direction he had already been heading, and been well clear of any potential path of the vehicle. Why he chose the former path rather than the latter, which the law demands, is hard to reconcile with any benign motive. Case law and training demand escape if possible, which it was.
5: Then he fired, not once, but three times. Again, it is hard to reconcile these shots, especially the last two, with benign motive. Also, shooting was tactically idiotic. The shots had no chance whatsoever of stopping or meaningfully slowing the vehicle before it hit or passed by Ross. If anything, his drawing of his weapon and shooting were likely to cause Good to slam on the gas. Furthermore, an out of control vehicle and potential stray bullets or ricochets were dangers to everyone in the area. Ross's act of "self-defense" was absurdly reckless, not defensive. The shooting of vehicles in cases such as this defy both training and case law.
6: Then Officer Ross flees the scene, apparently unhurt. This is indefensible.
7: Then the other officers block medical attention. This is also indefensible.
8: Then DHS blocks the state investigation and scuttles it internally. This is indefensible.
9: Political leadership spins a pile of slander and lies in defense of what happened. This is indefensible.
If we very generously assume Ross is the dumbest cop on earth and made all these ridiculous errors in good faith, it is still Second Degree Manslaughter per Minnesota law due to his culpable negligence. If malice was a factor, it rises to murder. The other cops on the scene should also have exposure to manslaughter laws due to their denial of medical assistance.
Excellent summary. And I know this is speculation, and we will probably never find out his actual motivations. I think it's possible this experienced officer, was reacting to what he perceived to be his partner who had his hand on the door handle being dragged with the car as it drove off, similar to what happened to him six months ago.
I agree Adrian. Now that they shot the soccer mom in the face, their shrill message about domestic terrorists is now even more empty than it was. Their whole schtick is enemies, black and white, good and evil. But now they've targeted an enemy they didn't intend. Fear a white lesbian mom for being mouthy? That won't play in Peoria, and they know it. That's why they're so frantic to enrage us by shitting all over Good and her family.
Black and brown people in this country may shrug and say "welcome to our world". And that is a very fair point. But now that my lily-white, 70 year old, former Republican face is on their enemy posters, the shoe is on the other foot. They want my privileged, well-educated, well-heeled, white ass as their enemy? Ok.
btw, on the hypocrisy angle, here are two pieces from today's The Shovel (Australia's answer to The Onion). It was either Charlie or Bill who first brought The Shovel to my/our attention and I have been enjoying it since. I don't get all the Australian political references, but their view on America and particularly Trump is priceless
Renee Goode I am afraid is a starting point in this unfolding national tragedy. Trump, Miller and the rest of them are aching for a mass ICE shooting event somewhere but even that will not be enough to satisfy them. The problem is the black hole in the brains of these people that can never be filled or illuminated with civilization. For them civilized behavior is soft and weak. The escalation will continue because they need the gratification that death and destruction brings to nourish their warped minds. To put an end to this somehow, somewhere a new leader must emerge to whom the good people of this country can rally. No one is visible yet, but I am sure one will come from the coming generation.
Agree 100%, Adrian. Not only was she white, a woman, and a citizen, but she was a middle class mom with stuffed animals in her car. About an un-threatening as you can get. That's why (as Sarah has emphasized) the right has been focusing on her marriage to a woman, in their desperate attempt to otherize her
Lot of people read The Bulwark. Surely some must be republican?
Any Republicans out there care to comment on this? Can you let us know why you think it's OK?
Because I see a LOT of arguments from the Left saying all this is so very, very wrong - and I never, ever see any cogent arguments about why it's right.
Adrian, as Clinton would have said, I feel your pain. But then I have to ask: what would you suggest as a better way to address the millions of people who entered the country illegally over the last few years? And to be clear illegal to me is those who came without going through a legal port of entry or filing the required documents.
The public clearly wants a functioning system, and if the question were put to a democratic vote, I suspect most Americans would support removing a large share of those who came entered illegally. The tactics we’ve seen so far may be flawed, but the underlying goal — returning the illegals — is widely shared.
So my question isn’t about defending or berating any particular politician. It’s simply this: what practical steps would you propose that would actually work in removing the majority of the illegals over the 24 months? ?
The tactics are NOT flawed & the underlying goal is NOT returning illegal immigrants to their home country. That's the PRETEXT. If it was the actual goal they would be in TX or FL which have **orders of magnitude** more illegal immigrants than MN. The GOAL is to sow unrest in D leaning cities in D leaning states and get a pretext to invoke the insurrection act. The goal is to cower Americans into submission. And the tactics for the actual goal are being executed perfectly.
But to answer your question -- I dunno -- maybe the way Obama did it? Deporting far more people than Trump has while focusing on actual **criminals.**
All without terrorizing American citizens, legal immigrants & those who are here illegally but contribute to the economic basis of the community & are not committing crimes. I mean, that would be a good start.
Most Americans also support giving people a way to be here. It might seem contradictory, but to the extent that "returning the illegals" is popular, it's because of misconceptions of who those people even are.
Yes, there are people who have entered the country illegally or who abused our backlog to be here. But many people live in the US without documentation because there's no other way for them to stay with family.
Chain immigration is only one part of the broader system. The immediate issue is that more than ten million people are living in the country without legal status, and that fact alone is creating deep national division. This is not about assigning blame to any particular administration. Over the years, different presidents have taken different approaches, but Congress has not created a lasting solution, and the problem has continued to grow.
Many of the people who arrived in recent years were misled about what the law allowed, but not knowing the law does not exempt anyone from it. At some point the country has to establish a clear, predictable process rather than letting the situation drift.
Two ideas follow from that.
First, if there had been a shared commitment early on to stop unlawful entry and to create a workable plan for dealing with those already here, the situation might not have escalated to this point.
Second, one possible approach would be to require all individuals without proper documentation to report to a designated public office—such as a post office or police station—and complete a basic identification form. They would be biometrically identified and, in return, receive a one‑year work‑authorization card. This would not include a driver’s license. If they maintain a clean record for that year, the permit could be extended for an additional two years.To support this system, employers would face substantial penalties for hiring anyone without a valid work‑authorization card. A mandatory 20% tax withholding—beyond standard payroll taxes—could be applied to ensure compliance. Children born during this period would not automatically receive citizenship, and no one in this category would be eligible for citizenship unless Congress later adjusts immigration quotas and only then as slots become available. Non-compliance results in deportation.
This would establish a minimum baseline: a clear legal process, accountability for employers, and a structured path for identifying and managing those already here, without granting automatic amnesty.
Establish a major department of the government, like HUD. A cabinet position. Something that is funded like a military branch. A gigantic bureaucracy to process the people and data and provide regular reports to the president and Congress. A professional corps of career judges and attorneys who focus on who comes in, who they are, what programs they're on, and when they leave. The best quality people hired and given the best training in the world to enforce the border. Big. Boring. Effective.
The Dems should have done this when they had the chance but, no, even Obama took heat from the ultra-left wing, who were... a little out of step with Ma and Pa America. The result of this neglect is what we've got. It opened the political space for the right-wing rage to manifest its cruelty. They're rampaging and killing citizens. I'd say the message has been received.
Given the focus of this article is about the government sanctioned killing of an unarmed citizen, one that looked like the in-power majority and who was 'in the way' at best, and at worst, the best way to get 'even' with a mouthy, lesbian wife, your change of subject is disingenuous. If you feel that killing citizens who get in the way of these operations (which are also removing individuals with legal status and even US citizens) is just the cost of doing business, you appear to be on the wrong channel.
The deaths of people during a government action is an infection of the wound of illegal immigration. The wound must be healed. Without doing that there will always be future infections. I have paid to be on this channel to try and interject solutions. If this channel is just more TDS then yes I am on the wrong channel.
From CBS news: Renee Good, who died last week after she was shot by an ICE agent in Minneapolis, sustained at least three gunshot wounds and a possible fourth, according to a Minneapolis Fire Department report obtained by CBS News Minnesota. ... Responders found two apparent gunshot wounds to her chest, one to her left forearm, and "a possible gunshot wound with protruding tissue on the left side of the patient's head," the report says.
Which gunshot was fatal?
Was it the first, that went through the windshield? Or was it one of the 2 that went through the side windows (when the Jonathan Ross was no longer in the path of the car)?
Morally this makes not difference. But from the point of view of a possible crime, it makes a whole world of difference. If she died from the first shot, the officer could claim that this happened in the split second while he feared for his life. If she died from the shots fires through the side windows, that could be manslaughter plain and simple.
Is moved to mention Viola Liuzzo and run away
Also Schwerner and Goodman of course
Don’t forget James Chaney.
From Rabbi Danya Ruttenberg’s newsletter:
May each being on this planet be safe.
May everyone be protected from harm.
From the theft of human bodies and lives,
the suppression of freedom
From persecution,
famine,
terror.
May evildoers lose power and experience justice.
“May sins cease from the land” (Psalms 104:35)*
May those who cause great harm spend their lives in repentance, repair, atonement and healing.
May we bring into being–
through shared work
solidarity
and the sum of our actions and choices–
an era of collective liberation.
May everyone have what they need to flourish.
May every person receive dignity and care.
"There is the sea, vast and wide,
with its creatures beyond number,
living things, small and great." (Psalm 104:25)
May we each be a drop in the ocean.
May we, together, become the wave.
Awww, very nice (R' Ruttenberg usually represents a kind of femininity that I could not attain if I tried for 100 years)
This shooting and the MAGA rush to condemn the victim lays bare the true black, empty souls of both the Trump government and the MAGA voter base.
"I'm not mad at you" Last words said by Renee Good before she was slaughtered by a ICE gestapo agent. It appears the ICE gestapo have been given carte blanche to just kill anyone , The agent was making a video with his camera while he shot the lady in the head , She appeared to be driving away from the shooter at the time . What the hell is the gestapo doing at a peaceful protest anyway. I thought they were suppose to be getting hard core criminals and terrorists . If thats the case they may want to start at the White House.
Solidarity now. Please. Thank you for this piece, and stay safe in MN. That's all I have to say right now.
There was so, so much wrong about this encounter.
1: The entire stop was pretextual. ICE does not have authority over traffic or noise ordinances, so the claim was that this was about interference with officers. However, Good's car was only blocking one lane of a two lane one-way street. The officers could have easily driven past, as other cars had done. If the pretext was related to prior interactions they had with Good, they have provided no evidence as to her having violated the law earlier in the day. Thus the encounter from the start was legally dubious, as were any orders the officers may have given.
2: Officer Ross, rather than maintaining tactical and situational awareness, was playing with his phone. Even if recording was necessary for the job (a dubious claim), he was using the wrong tool in the wrong way.
3: Officer Ross blundered in front of Good's running car, then behind it, then in front of it again. The is a gross violation of both basic police training and common sense. Most parents are teaching their pre-schoolers not to do this. Adults have no excuse, doubly so when they are distracted by their phones.
4: When Good started backing up, in a patently obvious attempt to give her room to pass to the right of Officer Ross, Ross suddently stopped, squared up to the vehicle, switched his phone from right to left, drew his gun, leaned towards the car and aimed. In that same amount of time, he could have taken about three steps to the left, the direction he had already been heading, and been well clear of any potential path of the vehicle. Why he chose the former path rather than the latter, which the law demands, is hard to reconcile with any benign motive. Case law and training demand escape if possible, which it was.
5: Then he fired, not once, but three times. Again, it is hard to reconcile these shots, especially the last two, with benign motive. Also, shooting was tactically idiotic. The shots had no chance whatsoever of stopping or meaningfully slowing the vehicle before it hit or passed by Ross. If anything, his drawing of his weapon and shooting were likely to cause Good to slam on the gas. Furthermore, an out of control vehicle and potential stray bullets or ricochets were dangers to everyone in the area. Ross's act of "self-defense" was absurdly reckless, not defensive. The shooting of vehicles in cases such as this defy both training and case law.
6: Then Officer Ross flees the scene, apparently unhurt. This is indefensible.
7: Then the other officers block medical attention. This is also indefensible.
8: Then DHS blocks the state investigation and scuttles it internally. This is indefensible.
9: Political leadership spins a pile of slander and lies in defense of what happened. This is indefensible.
If we very generously assume Ross is the dumbest cop on earth and made all these ridiculous errors in good faith, it is still Second Degree Manslaughter per Minnesota law due to his culpable negligence. If malice was a factor, it rises to murder. The other cops on the scene should also have exposure to manslaughter laws due to their denial of medical assistance.
Excellent summary. And I know this is speculation, and we will probably never find out his actual motivations. I think it's possible this experienced officer, was reacting to what he perceived to be his partner who had his hand on the door handle being dragged with the car as it drove off, similar to what happened to him six months ago.
I agree Adrian. Now that they shot the soccer mom in the face, their shrill message about domestic terrorists is now even more empty than it was. Their whole schtick is enemies, black and white, good and evil. But now they've targeted an enemy they didn't intend. Fear a white lesbian mom for being mouthy? That won't play in Peoria, and they know it. That's why they're so frantic to enrage us by shitting all over Good and her family.
Black and brown people in this country may shrug and say "welcome to our world". And that is a very fair point. But now that my lily-white, 70 year old, former Republican face is on their enemy posters, the shoe is on the other foot. They want my privileged, well-educated, well-heeled, white ass as their enemy? Ok.
btw, on the hypocrisy angle, here are two pieces from today's The Shovel (Australia's answer to The Onion). It was either Charlie or Bill who first brought The Shovel to my/our attention and I have been enjoying it since. I don't get all the Australian political references, but their view on America and particularly Trump is priceless
https://theshovel.com.au/2026/01/15/trump-stance-on-civilians-being-shot-by-military-minnesota-iran/
https://theshovel.com.au/2026/01/14/trump-promises-to-restore-peace-to-iran-oil-industry/
Thank you, Adrian, for capturing the anger that so many of us are feeling right now.
Renee Goode I am afraid is a starting point in this unfolding national tragedy. Trump, Miller and the rest of them are aching for a mass ICE shooting event somewhere but even that will not be enough to satisfy them. The problem is the black hole in the brains of these people that can never be filled or illuminated with civilization. For them civilized behavior is soft and weak. The escalation will continue because they need the gratification that death and destruction brings to nourish their warped minds. To put an end to this somehow, somewhere a new leader must emerge to whom the good people of this country can rally. No one is visible yet, but I am sure one will come from the coming generation.
Agree 100%, Adrian. Not only was she white, a woman, and a citizen, but she was a middle class mom with stuffed animals in her car. About an un-threatening as you can get. That's why (as Sarah has emphasized) the right has been focusing on her marriage to a woman, in their desperate attempt to otherize her
Lot of people read The Bulwark. Surely some must be republican?
Any Republicans out there care to comment on this? Can you let us know why you think it's OK?
Because I see a LOT of arguments from the Left saying all this is so very, very wrong - and I never, ever see any cogent arguments about why it's right.
Thank you Adrian. This is one of your best.
"If people come together, they're fucked."
Can we get this on billboards across the country?
Adrian, as Clinton would have said, I feel your pain. But then I have to ask: what would you suggest as a better way to address the millions of people who entered the country illegally over the last few years? And to be clear illegal to me is those who came without going through a legal port of entry or filing the required documents.
The public clearly wants a functioning system, and if the question were put to a democratic vote, I suspect most Americans would support removing a large share of those who came entered illegally. The tactics we’ve seen so far may be flawed, but the underlying goal — returning the illegals — is widely shared.
So my question isn’t about defending or berating any particular politician. It’s simply this: what practical steps would you propose that would actually work in removing the majority of the illegals over the 24 months? ?
The tactics are NOT flawed & the underlying goal is NOT returning illegal immigrants to their home country. That's the PRETEXT. If it was the actual goal they would be in TX or FL which have **orders of magnitude** more illegal immigrants than MN. The GOAL is to sow unrest in D leaning cities in D leaning states and get a pretext to invoke the insurrection act. The goal is to cower Americans into submission. And the tactics for the actual goal are being executed perfectly.
But to answer your question -- I dunno -- maybe the way Obama did it? Deporting far more people than Trump has while focusing on actual **criminals.**
All without terrorizing American citizens, legal immigrants & those who are here illegally but contribute to the economic basis of the community & are not committing crimes. I mean, that would be a good start.
Most Americans also support giving people a way to be here. It might seem contradictory, but to the extent that "returning the illegals" is popular, it's because of misconceptions of who those people even are.
Yes, there are people who have entered the country illegally or who abused our backlog to be here. But many people live in the US without documentation because there's no other way for them to stay with family.
Chain immigration is only one part of the broader system. The immediate issue is that more than ten million people are living in the country without legal status, and that fact alone is creating deep national division. This is not about assigning blame to any particular administration. Over the years, different presidents have taken different approaches, but Congress has not created a lasting solution, and the problem has continued to grow.
Many of the people who arrived in recent years were misled about what the law allowed, but not knowing the law does not exempt anyone from it. At some point the country has to establish a clear, predictable process rather than letting the situation drift.
Two ideas follow from that.
First, if there had been a shared commitment early on to stop unlawful entry and to create a workable plan for dealing with those already here, the situation might not have escalated to this point.
Second, one possible approach would be to require all individuals without proper documentation to report to a designated public office—such as a post office or police station—and complete a basic identification form. They would be biometrically identified and, in return, receive a one‑year work‑authorization card. This would not include a driver’s license. If they maintain a clean record for that year, the permit could be extended for an additional two years.To support this system, employers would face substantial penalties for hiring anyone without a valid work‑authorization card. A mandatory 20% tax withholding—beyond standard payroll taxes—could be applied to ensure compliance. Children born during this period would not automatically receive citizenship, and no one in this category would be eligible for citizenship unless Congress later adjusts immigration quotas and only then as slots become available. Non-compliance results in deportation.
This would establish a minimum baseline: a clear legal process, accountability for employers, and a structured path for identifying and managing those already here, without granting automatic amnesty.
Establish a major department of the government, like HUD. A cabinet position. Something that is funded like a military branch. A gigantic bureaucracy to process the people and data and provide regular reports to the president and Congress. A professional corps of career judges and attorneys who focus on who comes in, who they are, what programs they're on, and when they leave. The best quality people hired and given the best training in the world to enforce the border. Big. Boring. Effective.
The Dems should have done this when they had the chance but, no, even Obama took heat from the ultra-left wing, who were... a little out of step with Ma and Pa America. The result of this neglect is what we've got. It opened the political space for the right-wing rage to manifest its cruelty. They're rampaging and killing citizens. I'd say the message has been received.
Why don't you ask President Obama? His admin managed to remove 3 million (peacefully) as opposed to trumps thugs 1.2 million (2016 - 2020)
Given the focus of this article is about the government sanctioned killing of an unarmed citizen, one that looked like the in-power majority and who was 'in the way' at best, and at worst, the best way to get 'even' with a mouthy, lesbian wife, your change of subject is disingenuous. If you feel that killing citizens who get in the way of these operations (which are also removing individuals with legal status and even US citizens) is just the cost of doing business, you appear to be on the wrong channel.
The deaths of people during a government action is an infection of the wound of illegal immigration. The wound must be healed. Without doing that there will always be future infections. I have paid to be on this channel to try and interject solutions. If this channel is just more TDS then yes I am on the wrong channel.
Legalize them and expand legal immigration generally. Only deport felons.
From CBS news: Renee Good, who died last week after she was shot by an ICE agent in Minneapolis, sustained at least three gunshot wounds and a possible fourth, according to a Minneapolis Fire Department report obtained by CBS News Minnesota. ... Responders found two apparent gunshot wounds to her chest, one to her left forearm, and "a possible gunshot wound with protruding tissue on the left side of the patient's head," the report says.
Which gunshot was fatal?
Was it the first, that went through the windshield? Or was it one of the 2 that went through the side windows (when the Jonathan Ross was no longer in the path of the car)?
Why does that matter. The gun should never have been unholstered in the first place, hell Ross should never have been there.
Morally this makes not difference. But from the point of view of a possible crime, it makes a whole world of difference. If she died from the first shot, the officer could claim that this happened in the split second while he feared for his life. If she died from the shots fires through the side windows, that could be manslaughter plain and simple.