2025 and Beyond Domestic Rightist Violence Thread

[UNI88]

All videos show him getting hit. The narration of the left says he didn't get hit.

Also, if you look at the coverage, the mainstream media is attempting to portray Good and her wife as innocent bystanders. The truth is they are paid agitators who were there to intentionally interfere with lawful federal law enforcement operations.

Proof from an unbiased source that Renee Good was a paid agitator?

[Gil Dobie]

Also, if you look at the coverage, the mainstream media is attempting to portray Good and her wife as innocent bystanders. The truth is they are paid agitators who were there to intentionally interfere with lawful federal law enforcement operations.

Proof from an unbiased source that Renee Good was a paid agitator?

The video I posted shows Good and spouse agitating the officer

[Baldy]

Also, if you look at the coverage, the mainstream media is attempting to portray Good and her wife as innocent bystanders. The truth is they are paid agitators who were there to intentionally interfere with lawful federal law enforcement operations.

Proof from an unbiased source that Renee Good was a paid agitator?

You're more than welcome to post proof from an unbiased source that she wasn't.

[UNI88]

Proof from an unbiased source that Renee Good was a paid agitator?

The video I posted shows Good and spouse agitating the officer

She's a protester so yes she was agitating those she was protesting against. Do you have proof that someone was paying her to do so?

Proof from an unbiased source that Renee Good was a paid agitator?

You're more than welcome to post proof from an unbiased source that she wasn't.

I have found no evidence supporting the claim that that Renee Good was paid to protest.

You're asking me to prove a negative - you have nothing but what's being said in MAQA yahoo echo chambers.

[BDKJMU]

ICE officers have no authority to search a US citizen or arrest her (unless there's probable cause to believe she's harboring undocumented individuals, not a contention here).

WRONG.

Obstruction charges generally arise when someone is accused of interfering with an ICE agent’s duties during an arrest, investigation or deportation proceeding. This could include physically blocking an officer, providing false information or refusing to comply with lawful commands. Assault charges, on the other hand, involve accusations of threatening, attempting to harm or physically injuring an ICE agent. Even if no serious injury occurs, federal prosecutors tend to treat these allegations with particular severity, given their need to protect government employees.

https://www.turnerlawsandiego.com/blog/ ... ice-agent/

And she didn’t see this video.

[kalm]

None of which, of course, I’ve said or done. Which makes dishonest. Big shocker there.

Yes, you pulled this same stunt when Trump got shot. All shocked like you didn't know how it happened. Now you are trying to downplay a woman who supposedly was part of an anti -Ice group that employed the tactics that got her shot.

You'll again act like you haven't promoted this horse crap.

First law of holes.

You’re in one. Yet you keep shoveling. Based on what? Your perception and biases? What you want to hear? This isn’t the first time you’ve done this.

[kalm]

Reminds me of Jesus…in a couple of ways.

Jesus would not be filled with hate towards ICE. He was for peace not vigilantism.

Ah yes. ICE are purely the victims here. Not instigators..at all!

Jesus was clearly anti-immigrant and pro-authoritarian state.

[kalm]

ICE officers have no authority to search a US citizen or arrest her (unless there's probable cause to believe she's harboring undocumented individuals, not a contention here).

WRONG.

Obstruction charges generally arise when someone is accused of interfering with an ICE agent’s duties during an arrest, investigation or deportation proceeding. This could include physically blocking an officer, providing false information or refusing to comply with lawful commands. Assault charges, on the other hand, involve accusations of threatening, attempting to harm or physically injuring an ICE agent. Even if no serious injury occurs, federal prosecutors tend to treat these allegations with particular severity, given their need to protect government employees.

https://www.turnerlawsandiego.com/blog/ ... ice-agent/

And she didn’t see this video.

Did they have probable cause that she was attempting to obstruct?

Regardless, they had zero legal justification or LE training suggesting they should stand in front if the vehicle and then murder her.

[Gil Dobie]

Jesus would not be filled with hate towards ICE. He was for peace not vigilantism.

Ah yes. ICE are purely the victims here. Not instigators..at all!

Jesus was clearly anti-immigrant and pro-authoritarian state.

More spin, ICE is people working at a profession, going after law breakers.

You don't know Jesus!

[Gil Dobie]

The video I posted shows Good and spouse agitating the officer

She's a protester so yes she was agitating those she was protesting against. Do you have proof that someone was paying her to do so?

You're more than welcome to post proof from an unbiased source that she wasn't.

I have found no evidence supporting the claim that that Renee Good was paid to protest.

You're asking me to prove a negative - you have nothing but what's being said in MAQA yahoo echo chambers.

They were agitators, law breaker. Paid ir not paid

[SeattleGriz]

Yes, you pulled this same stunt when Trump got shot. All shocked like you didn't know how it happened. Now you are trying to downplay a woman who supposedly was part of an anti -Ice group that employed the tactics that got her shot.

You'll again act like you haven't promoted this horse crap.

First law of holes.

You’re in one. Yet you keep shoveling. Based on what? Your perception and biases? What you want to hear? This isn’t the first time you’ve done this.

You haven't been promoting oppositional defiance against ICE?

[SeattleGriz]

WRONG.

https://www.turnerlawsandiego.com/blog/ ... ice-agent/

And she didn’t see this video.

Did they have probable cause that she was attempting to obstruct?

Regardless, they had zero legal justification or LE training suggesting they should stand in front if the vehicle and then murder her.

When she backed up, it put her on a direct path with the officer. Watch the video.

This is NOT a good look.

[kalm]

First law of holes.

You’re in one. Yet you keep shoveling. Based on what? Your perception and biases? What you want to hear? This isn’t the first time you’ve done this.

You haven't been promoting oppositional defiance against ICE?

Define oppositional defiance.

[kalm]

Did they have probable cause that she was attempting to obstruct?

Regardless, they had zero legal justification or LE training suggesting they should stand in front if the vehicle and then murder her.

When she backed up, it put her on a direct path with the officer. Watch the video.

This is NOT a good look.

Yes. And then turned her tires away from him as moved to the side. He should never been in front of the vehicle to begin with.

[Gil Dobie]

You generally cannot legally refuse to exit your vehicle when a police officer orders you to during a traffic stop; U.S. Supreme Court rulings like Pennsylvania v. Mimms establish officers' authority to order drivers (and passengers) out for safety, and refusing a lawful order can lead to escalation, arrest for obstruction or resisting arrest, and potential force. While you have constitutional rights, challenging an officer's order on the roadside is not the place; the legality is determined later in court, and the best practice is to comply calmly.

[UNI88]

Ah yes. ICE are purely the victims here. Not instigators..at all!

Jesus was clearly anti-immigrant and pro-authoritarian state.

More spin, ICE is people working at a profession, going after law breakers.

You don't know Jesus!

Gil, that's disingenuous. Many immigration violations are civil not criminal infractions. That's part of what allows the trump regime to use things like expedited removal. If they're law breakers then so are all American citizens who have been issued a traffic citation.

More importantly, what is happening from an immigration perspective in 2025/2026 is vastly different from what was happening prior to that. Some of it is good (securing the border, apprehending and deporting dangerous criminals) but a lot of it is questionable and has caused a lot of normal people to stand up and protest. The protesters aren't all AnTiFa or purple haired radicals, they're your neighbors, your hairdresser, your Pilates classmate, etc. The label that they're all unhinged, radical extremists is a LIE. Public opinion toward ICE and their tactics is negative and dropping while public opinion toward the protests is close to 50/50.

Here is some of what DHS is doing differently with immigration from the past:

1. Expanded Use of Expedited Removal - deportation without a full immigration court hearing in many cases. Accelerates removal timelines and limits procedural safeguards that existed under the prior administration.
2. Curtailment of Temporary Protected Status, Humanitarian Parole & Family Reunification Parole Programs for immigrants from countries such as Venezuela, Haiti, Cuba, Nicaragua, Nepal, Sudan, and Cameroon
3. Rescinding enforcement restrictions in sensitive locations such as schools, hospitals.
4. Enforcement Operations Inside U.S. Cities
5. Reported harsh conditions (overcrowding, hygiene, health care, and nutrition) in immigration detention facilities
6. Alleged limiting access by attorneys and families to detainees and sometimes moving detainees around so that their attorneys and families don’t know even where they are.
7. Enforcement has broadened beyond serious criminal records to include people without criminal histories, people who have been here since they were children (many of whom don't remember their country of origin), people whose legal status or immigration pathways have “stalled”, large groups of parolees and TPS holders whose status was recently removed or terminated.
8. Deporting illegal immigrants to prisons in countries other than their country of origin (CECOT in El Salvador) often to for sentences of indeterminate length and where they face overcrowding, poor conditions & torture (cruel & unusual punishment). Many immigration violations are considered civil infractions and that is how the regime is able to use expedited removal. But it is fair to question if that approach is appropriate if we’re deporting people to serve what are essentially criminal sentences without due process.
9. Unnecessary violence against peaceful protesters. There are plenty of examples from the pastor who was shot in the head while praying to tear gassing a kid's Halloween parade to violently grabbing and dragging a blind man into a facility.

Some people are okay with these changes, it's what they voted for. A lot of people aren't and they are demonstrating their disagreement as is their Constitutional right.

[Caribbean Hen]

There was nothing patriotic about what she was doing unless she was a foreign adversary, patriotic to whatever country she didn’t hate

What she was doing was more patriotic than what the seditious rioters were doing on January 6 but that hasn't stopped trump and others from calling them patriotic (they're who I paraphrased). Why haven't you called them out? Oh right, you've sold your soul, put your spine on a shelf, cut off your gonads and pledged absolute fealty to your false god. Whatever he says or does is righteous.

You should attach your keyboard to the local wind farm, the power bills in Portland would plummet… and your nonsense would actually go to good use

[Caribbean Hen]

More spin, ICE is people working at a profession, going after law breakers.

You don't know Jesus!

Gil, that's disingenuous.

What is happening from an immigration perspective in 2025/2026 is vastly different from what was happening prior to that. Some of it is good (securing the border, apprehending and deporting dangerous criminals) but a lot of it is questionable and has caused a lot of normal people to stand up and protest. The protesters aren't all AnTiFa or purple haired radicals, they're your neighbors, your hairdresser, your Pilates classmate, etc. The label that they're all unhinged, radical extremists is a LIE. Public opinion toward ICE and their tactics is negative and dropping while public opinion toward the protests is close to 50/50.

Here is some of what DHS is doing differently with immigration from the past:

1. Expanded Use of Expedited Removal - deportation without a full immigration court hearing in many cases. Accelerates removal timelines and limits procedural safeguards that existed under the prior administration.
2. Curtailment of Temporary Protected Status, Humanitarian Parole & Family Reunification Parole Programs for immigrants from countries such as Venezuela, Haiti, Cuba, Nicaragua, Nepal, Sudan, and Cameroon
3. Rescinding enforcement restrictions in sensitive locations such as schools, hospitals.
4. Enforcement Operations Inside U.S. Cities
5. Reported harsh conditions (overcrowding, hygiene, health care, and nutrition) in immigration detention facilities
6. Alleged limiting access by attorneys and families to detainees and sometimes moving detainees around so that their attorneys and families don’t know even where they are.
7. Enforcement has broadened beyond serious criminal records to include people without criminal histories, people who have been here since they were children (many of whom don't remember their country of origin), people whose legal status or immigration pathways have “stalled”, large groups of parolees and TPS holders whose status was recently removed or terminated.
8. Deporting illegal immigrants to prisons in countries other than their country of origin (CECOT in El Salvador) often to for sentences of indeterminate length and where they face overcrowding, poor conditions & torture (cruel & unusual punishment). Many immigration violations are considered civil infractions and that is how the regime is able to use expedited removal. But it is fair to question if that approach is appropriate if we’re deporting people to serve what are essentially criminal sentences without due process.
9. Unnecessary violence against peaceful protesters. There are plenty of examples from the pastor who was shot in the head while praying to tear gassing a kid's Halloween parade to violently grabbing and dragging a blind man into a facility.

Some people are okay with these changes, it's what they voted for. A lot of people aren't and they are demonstrating their disagreement as is their Constitutional right.

Flapping in the breeze

Where does it say in the constitution that you’re allowed to impede a law-enforcement operation without being guilty of a crime yourself?

[UNI88]

Gil, that's disingenuous.

What is happening from an immigration perspective in 2025/2026 is vastly different from what was happening prior to that. Some of it is good (securing the border, apprehending and deporting dangerous criminals) but a lot of it is questionable and has caused a lot of normal people to stand up and protest. The protesters aren't all AnTiFa or purple haired radicals, they're your neighbors, your hairdresser, your Pilates classmate, etc. The label that they're all unhinged, radical extremists is a LIE. Public opinion toward ICE and their tactics is negative and dropping while public opinion toward the protests is close to 50/50.

Here is some of what DHS is doing differently with immigration from the past:

1. Expanded Use of Expedited Removal - deportation without a full immigration court hearing in many cases. Accelerates removal timelines and limits procedural safeguards that existed under the prior administration.
2. Curtailment of Temporary Protected Status, Humanitarian Parole & Family Reunification Parole Programs for immigrants from countries such as Venezuela, Haiti, Cuba, Nicaragua, Nepal, Sudan, and Cameroon
3. Rescinding enforcement restrictions in sensitive locations such as schools, hospitals.
4. Enforcement Operations Inside U.S. Cities
5. Reported harsh conditions (overcrowding, hygiene, health care, and nutrition) in immigration detention facilities
6. Alleged limiting access by attorneys and families to detainees and sometimes moving detainees around so that their attorneys and families don’t know even where they are.
7. Enforcement has broadened beyond serious criminal records to include people without criminal histories, people who have been here since they were children (many of whom don't remember their country of origin), people whose legal status or immigration pathways have “stalled”, large groups of parolees and TPS holders whose status was recently removed or terminated.
8. Deporting illegal immigrants to prisons in countries other than their country of origin (CECOT in El Salvador) often to for sentences of indeterminate length and where they face overcrowding, poor conditions & torture (cruel & unusual punishment). Many immigration violations are considered civil infractions and that is how the regime is able to use expedited removal. But it is fair to question if that approach is appropriate if we’re deporting people to serve what are essentially criminal sentences without due process.
9. Unnecessary violence against peaceful protesters. There are plenty of examples from the pastor who was shot in the head while praying to tear gassing a kid's Halloween parade to violently grabbing and dragging a blind man into a facility.

Some people are okay with these changes, it's what they voted for. A lot of people aren't and they are demonstrating their disagreement as is their Constitutional right.

Flapping in the breeze

Where does it say in the constitution that you’re allowed to impede a law-enforcement operation without being guilty of a crime yourself?

You're one of the people who is okay with these changes, the majority of Americans disagree with you.

Let's review the ICE Protesters tactics for legality (IMO):

1. Legal (protected) protest activities
   • Chanting, holding signs, and slogans
   • Protesting outside ICE/CBP facilities on public sidewalks or parks
   • Demonstrating near—but not blocking—facilities or entrances
   • Photographing or filming ICE/CBP agents in public spaces
   • Yelling at officers or expressing dissent verbally
   • Blowing whistles to alert people that ICE/CBP is in the area
   • Honking horns to signal or warn (not continuously or violating traffic/noise laws)
   • Informing people of their rights in general terms (e.g., right to remain silent, right to a lawyer)
     
     Protected under: First Amendment (speech, assembly, petition)
2. Risky but sometimes lawful
   • Surrounding ICE vehicles without blocking movement
   • Standing close to officers while shouting
   • Following officers at a distance
     
     Legal if they do not physically impede the officers or specific enforcement action, but they carry higher risk of arrest, especially if law enforcement interprets the actions as interference.
3. Illegal protest activities (obstructive or criminal)
   
   • Blocking entrances/exits to ICE facilities
   • Blocking roads used by ICE vehicles
   • Surrounding vehicles to prevent movement
   • Interfering with arrests or detentions
   • Grabbing officers, equipment, or detainees
   • Pulling someone away from officers
   • Creating diversions to stop an arrest
   • Harboring or aiding someone to evade law enforcement
   • Property damage or vandalism

Much of what the protesters have done is not criminal, some is and I have no problem with them being arrested charged.

Do you have a problem with ICE/CBP agents who use excessive force or break other laws being arrested and charged? Answer the question - Yes or No.

[Gil Dobie]

Gil, that's disingenuous.

What is happening from an immigration perspective in 2025/2026 is vastly different from what was happening prior to that. Some of it is good (securing the border, apprehending and deporting dangerous criminals) but a lot of it is questionable and has caused a lot of normal people to stand up and protest. The protesters aren't all AnTiFa or purple haired radicals, they're your neighbors, your hairdresser, your Pilates classmate, etc. The label that they're all unhinged, radical extremists is a LIE. Public opinion toward ICE and their tactics is negative and dropping while public opinion toward the protests is close to 50/50.

Here is some of what DHS is doing differently with immigration from the past:

1. Expanded Use of Expedited Removal - deportation without a full immigration court hearing in many cases. Accelerates removal timelines and limits procedural safeguards that existed under the prior administration.
2. Curtailment of Temporary Protected Status, Humanitarian Parole & Family Reunification Parole Programs for immigrants from countries such as Venezuela, Haiti, Cuba, Nicaragua, Nepal, Sudan, and Cameroon
3. Rescinding enforcement restrictions in sensitive locations such as schools, hospitals.
4. Enforcement Operations Inside U.S. Cities
5. Reported harsh conditions (overcrowding, hygiene, health care, and nutrition) in immigration detention facilities
6. Alleged limiting access by attorneys and families to detainees and sometimes moving detainees around so that their attorneys and families don’t know even where they are.
7. Enforcement has broadened beyond serious criminal records to include people without criminal histories, people who have been here since they were children (many of whom don't remember their country of origin), people whose legal status or immigration pathways have “stalled”, large groups of parolees and TPS holders whose status was recently removed or terminated.
8. Deporting illegal immigrants to prisons in countries other than their country of origin (CECOT in El Salvador) often to for sentences of indeterminate length and where they face overcrowding, poor conditions & torture (cruel & unusual punishment). Many immigration violations are considered civil infractions and that is how the regime is able to use expedited removal. But it is fair to question if that approach is appropriate if we’re deporting people to serve what are essentially criminal sentences without due process.
9. Unnecessary violence against peaceful protesters. There are plenty of examples from the pastor who was shot in the head while praying to tear gassing a kid's Halloween parade to violently grabbing and dragging a blind man into a facility.

Some people are okay with these changes, it's what they voted for. A lot of people aren't and they are demonstrating their disagreement as is their Constitutional right.

Flapping in the breeze

Where does it say in the constitution that you’re allowed to impede a law-enforcement operation without being guilty of a crime yourself?

If you are breaking the law you need to take responsibility for your actions. I don't care what your job or affiliation is.

[Baldy]

Yeah, she definitely did not hit the ICE Agent...

What does that prove? Did he get hit or did he do something with his phone to pull his weapon?

You choose to believe this video and others that appear to show he did get hit but there are other videos that appear to show that he didn't get hit.

The investigation will need to look at and synchronize all the available videos. Even after they do that, I'm not sure they'll be able to definitively know. I do think they'll be able to tell if the 2nd and 3rd shots were necessary or excessive force.

"Appear"

[UNI88]

What does that prove? Did he get hit or did he do something with his phone to pull his weapon?

You choose to believe this video and others that appear to show he did get hit but there are other videos that appear to show that he didn't get hit.

The investigation will need to look at and synchronize all the available videos. Even after they do that, I'm not sure they'll be able to definitively know. I do think they'll be able to tell if the 2nd and 3rd shots were necessary or excessive force.

"Appear"

No other video shows her car going from reverse to moving forward that fast.

Why does that video "appear" to be intentionally sped up? Maybe because it makes it look even more like he got hit? Would it be less effective in doing that if it were at actual speed or slow-motion?

You keep posting videos that show what you want to believe. Are you ignoring ones that cast doubt on it.

[kalm]

Flapping in the breeze

Where does it say in the constitution that you’re allowed to impede a law-enforcement operation without being guilty of a crime yourself?

If you are breaking the law you need to take responsibility for your actions. I don't care what your job or affiliation is.

Except if your President or the cast of 1000’s he’s pardoned. Did you vote for him Gil?

[Baldy]

"Appear"

No other video shows her car going from reverse to moving forward that fast.

Why does that video "appear" to be intentionally sped up? Maybe because it makes it look even more like he got hit? Would it be less effective in doing that if it were at actual speed or slow-motion?

You keep posting videos that show what you want to believe. Are you ignoring ones that cast doubt on it.

The car isn't reversing in that video clip.

I'm posting videos that show the officer was hit by the car. Are you really still trying to say the car didnt hit him?Really???

Even Jacob Frey has changed his tune and is now saying...we'll he didn't get hit that hard.

[UNI88]

No other video shows her car going from reverse to moving forward that fast.

Why does that video "appear" to be intentionally sped up? Maybe because it makes it look even more like he got hit? Would it be less effective in doing that if it were at actual speed or slow-motion?

You keep posting videos that show what you want to believe. Are you ignoring ones that cast doubt on it.

The car isn't reversing in that video clip.

I'm posting videos that show the officer was hit by the car. Are you really still trying to say the car didnt hit him?Really???

Even Jacob Frey has changed his tune and is now saying...we'll he didn't get hit that hard.

Are you really this clueless or are you being intentionally obtuse? It might not show in your video but she reversed before she pulled forward. In no other video that I've seen did she appear to be going nearly as fast as in that video. Which leads me to believe that the video was altered for dramatic effect. Why? What is the agenda of the person who altered it?

Links to Frey changing his tune? This doesn't sound like he changed his tune ...
Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey dismisses new ICE shooting video, says agent 'walked away with a hop in his step'

"He walked away with a hop in his step from the incident. There's another person that's dead. He held on his cell phone. I think that speaks for itself," Frey reacted.

"Does that video, that angle change your perspective at all about what may have happened?" Johnson asked.

"I think an investigation could change or affirm my perspective," Frey responded. "But we've [all got] two eyes, and I can see a person that is trying to leave. I can see an ICE agent that was not run over by a car. That didn't happen."

I'm not stating that she didn't hit him. I'm stating that I don't think it's clear that she did or didn't and needs to be investigated.

Let me ask you this - what if they find that he had legitimate reason to fear for his life and his first shot was justified but they also find that his life was no longer in danger when he fired the subsequent shots. Should he be held accountable for firing those shots? What if one of those shots was the fatal shot?