New documents shed light on Renee Good’s ties to ICE monitoring efforts in Minneapolis

[Yarddog]

 

[stevevw]

I just quoted your text from post 185.

Yes. That is why I am confused that you take what I said to one poster and say it was in response to another poster. I was merely replying to Hans. I did not know the context you are talking about.

Yes, when did Renee's wife say that the couple were agitating officers earlier and planned to do the same later that day?

When she said something aong the lines to the officer "you know the routine, its been the same every time you have seen us. It will be the same later on today when you see us again.

Admitting that they had encounters with officers on a number of occassions and that this was not a one off. But an organised ongoing agitation.

She also more or less made a threat which says something about how they seen the encfounter. What she said "come on are you going to go at us or what". Or something along those lines. As though there was some sort of confrontation that was happening or going to happen. A challenge to their authroity perhaps.

This was a turning point I think because directly after that challenge the officer said for Good to get out of the car. But instead Goods wife tried to get in the car disobeying the officers. Then she said to Renee "drive baby drive". as though now that the officers wanted her to get out of the car they were going to defy that and drive off. Escapte being stopped and be arrested for obstruction and antagonising a lawful instruction.

No, in post #185 YOU said this:

When did the Renee's wife say that?

I just explained this above.

 

[Stopped_lurking]

Yes. That is why I am confused that you take what I said to one poster and say it was in response to another poster. I was merely replying to Hans. I did not know the context you are talking about.

When she said something aong the lines to the officer "you know the routine, its been the same every time you have seen us.

She never said that.

It will be the same later on today when you see us again.

This one is closer to what she said, but she said when ICE comes and visit them later. I have my transcript and a link to conversation in the following post.

New documents shed light on Renee Good’s ties to ICE monitoring efforts in Minneapolis

Wife. No quote marks required. Let's at least be accurate about such simple details. Quotes stay...but I can see why YOU dont agree with it...

www.christianforums.com

Admitting that they had encounters with officers on a number of occassions and that this was not a one off.

Where did she say that? Not in the above linked conversation.

But an organised ongoing agitation.

She also more or less made a threat which says something about how they seen the encfounter. What she said "come on are you going to go at us or what". Or something along those lines. As though there was some sort of confrontation that was happening or going to happen. A challenge to their authroity perhaps.

You are using a lot of quotation marks whilst messing up the quotes.

Where do you get them from?

I just explained this above.

 

[rjs330]

Where is ICE authorized to block traffic? Can you provide that from their manual?

Its in state law. Every state has that law. Did you not know that?

Evidently you haven listenedbto the Minneapolis police Chief.

Oh? Did he say that? Then why aren't they doing that then

ICE officers are not police officers and do not have authority over traffic control, unless obstruction occurs, which hasn't been established in this case.

ICE officers are Law Enforcement Officers. That counts.

Then they also wouldn't recognize that Ms Good was doing anything wrong. She wasn't blocking her driving lane, the ICE officer

Yes she was, you can see the lines on the roadway. She's parked sideways in it. Yup, against the law.

I'd be happy to.

Okay, let us know. Be sure to film it for us.

 

[stevevw]

You are apparently still not getting my point, Steve. The point wasn't on the delay, it was the *manner* of the information getting out. It is very hinky that the kind of information that is normally released openly with confirmation from medical professionals (details of injuries to officers injured by attackers) was laundered through anonymous statements to regime-friendly news outlets.

I think you are not getting my point as well. You are using this anonymous and sketchy source to claim that my source is wrong. Who says your source is correct. Most of the so called anonymous sources are proven false.

They are ananymous for the very fact that no one can verify them. A report claims an anonymous sources said this or that. Thats how fake news gets spread.

So here we have a direct sourced that is identified. As opposed to a shady anonymous source and you can't verify whether its actual fact.

 

[rjs330]

Neither should the ICE agent. Where was the illegal immigrant that he was looking for? The ICE agent doesn't have authority over citizens.

Yes they do.

ICE Arrest Powers Beyond Immigration, When Federal Agents Can Detain Citizens

ICE can arrest citizens for federal crimes under Title 18 authority, obstruction, and cross-designation. Know your rights during federal agent encounters

allaboutlawyer.com

 

[MrMoe]

I've never denied it. But, at the time of the incident, ICE was blocking the road.

They were parked on the side of the road parallel to the road which is not blocking the road.

No she wasn't. Look at your video.

I did. There are no vehicles in front or behind her preventing her from moving her car. She did it deliberately.

Okay, have the local police write her a ticket, and send her home to her kids. That is all she deserved.

And if they came to write her a ticket and she did the same thing of hitting the officer while driving off and the officer shot at her, who would you blame then?

He doesn't have the authority to order her out of her car. He isn't a police officer and she wasn't obstructing their operation. She was protesting and only deserved a traffic ticket.

They do have the authority under certain circumstances. Look it up.

That's cold.

I know. It was a common response to Ashley Babbitt’s killing.

It's what former ICE officials testified to and what several state and federal judges also stated in cases where they have told ICE to cease violating civilians civil rights.

So second hand testimony.

She violated traffic laws. Not criminal laws.

Still a law breaker by definition.

No but filming and protesting ICE is.

Those don’t cancel out her offences.

A traffic violation.

Yes. And not following the officer’s orders.

 

[Yarddog]

Its in state law. Every state has that law. Did you not know that?

Mine doesn't. I checked.

ICE officers are Law Enforcement Officers. That counts.

ICE is immigration enforcement not Police. They are not traffic control officers. Their authority is limited to immigration.

Yes she was, you can see the lines on the roadway. She's parked sideways in it. Yup, against the law.

Yes, a traffic violation not within ICE's authority. They can't write traffic citations.

 

[Yarddog]

Yes they do.

ICE Arrest Powers Beyond Immigration, When Federal Agents Can Detain Citizens

ICE can arrest citizens for federal crimes under Title 18 authority, obstruction, and cross-designation. Know your rights during federal agent encounters

allaboutlawyer.com

As your article shows, it's very limited.

 

[Yarddog]

They were parked on the side of the road parallel to the road which is not blocking the road.

They were blocking one lane of traffic where their operation was taking place. Good's vehicle had no effect on that operation.

I did. There are no vehicles in front or behind her preventing her from moving her car. She did it deliberately.

Correct, she had no effect on the ICE agents to do their duty. She was guilty of a traffic violation and not obstruction.

And if they came to write her a ticket and she did the same thing of hitting the officer while driving off and the officer shot at her, who would you blame then?

Depends. Police wouldn't have approached her screaming at her to get out. Police are trained to deescalate a situation. If police had been yelling conflicting orders, as the ICE agents were, they would had been partially at fault.

They do have the authority under certain circumstances. Look it up.

I have said that but since she wasn't obstructing their operation, they had no authority.

I know. It was a common response to Ashley Babbitt’s killing.

Her situation was totally different than Good's.

So second hand testimony.

No, first hand testimony. Former ICE officials know what their officers are trained in. Judges also know the law and rule on these cases.

Still a law breaker by definition.

Not a criminal law breaker.

Those don’t cancel out her offences.

No one said they did. The only illegal thing that she did was a traffic violation.

Yes. And not following the officer’s orders.

You don't have to obey unlawful orders.

 

[stevevw]

She never said that.

I said something along those lines. I found the exact words now.

Her wife, Rebecca Good, was outside the car and spoke to the ICE agent, saying “We don’t change our plates every morning. It will be the same plate when you talk to us later,”

Rebecca and ICE agent Jonathan Ross's last words to Renee Nicole Good revealed: What Rebecca said about Minneapolis fatal shooting?

Rebecca and ICE agent Jonathan Ross's last words to Renee Nicole Good revealed. New footage shows the moments before Renee Good, 37, was shot and killed in Minneapolis. Her wife, Rebecca, shares details of the incident and her grief. The video raises questions about the encounter and responses...

economictimes.indiatimes.com

As I said this suggests that this encounter was not or would not be the only encounter with ICE agents. Afterall they were part of a social group whose aim was to make it hard for ICE agents to do their job. So obviously this was not the only time.

Theres also a video showing her words at the 20 second mark. She also says at the 30 second mark "do you want to come at us" twice and then "go get yourself some lunch big boy". Before the officer then said for Renee to get out of the car. Instead Rebecca tried to get into the car defying the officers.

This one is closer to what she said, but she said when ICE comes and visit them later. I have my transcript and a link to conversation in the following post.

New documents shed light on Renee Good’s ties to ICE monitoring efforts in Minneapolis

Wife. No quote marks required. Let's at least be accurate about such simple details. Quotes stay...but I can see why YOU dont agree with it...

www.christianforums.com

Ah I am understanding what you are on about now. Honestly my reference to Renee partners words were not in relation to you discussion with the other poster. I did not even see this. I just metioned that as one piece of evidence with others that came out later.

Despite that now I have been brought into this particular issue I agree with the other poster. That the confrontation with Renee and her partner was not the first time.

Like I said they belonged to a group whose mission was to make it hard for ICE. Why would you think this was their only encounter.

Renees partner mentions that the "don't change their plates every morning". This suggests that they have encountered ICE officers on other mornings. If it was the first time they had protested then there will be no 'other mornings". So why say it.

She said these will be the same plates when they meet that afternoon. She is telling everyone that they are going to do the same that day. This shows it was not about a one off protest. This was an ongoing agitation and making it hard for law enforcement officers to do their job. Which is a crime in itself.

Where did she say that? Not in the above linked conversation.

Saying that the number plates will be the same every morning suggests they are going out every morning. Shes saying 'don't worry if you see us each morning the number plate will be the same. So you don't have to keep checking it'.

She suggests the same again when she says "they will be the same plates when you come talk to us later".

They are admitting they have done this more than once. They are admitting they will be doing the same later that day.

You are using a lot of quotation marks whilst messing up the quotes.

Where do you get them from?

The actual words from Renee's wife Rebecca Nicole Good. In the transcript and video above.

 

[Stopped_lurking]

I said something along those lines. I found the exact words now.

Her wife, Rebecca Good, was outside the car and spoke to the ICE agent, saying “We don’t change our plates every morning. It will be the same plate when you talk to us later,”

Rebecca and ICE agent Jonathan Ross's last words to Renee Nicole Good revealed: What Rebecca said about Minneapolis fatal shooting?

Rebecca and ICE agent Jonathan Ross's last words to Renee Nicole Good revealed. New footage shows the moments before Renee Good, 37, was shot and killed in Minneapolis. Her wife, Rebecca, shares details of the incident and her grief. The video raises questions about the encounter and responses...

economictimes.indiatimes.com

As I said this suggests that this encounter was not or would not be the only encounter with ICE agents. Afterall they were part of a social group whose aim was to make it hard for ICE agents to do their job. So obviously this was not the only time.

That is not obvious. Is there any reports of any previous encounters?

Theres also a video showing her words at the 20 second mark. She also says at the 30 second mark "do you want to come at us" twice and then "go get yourself some lunch big boy". Before the officer then said for Renee to get out of the car. Instead Rebecca tried to get into the car defying the officers.

Ah I am understanding what you are on about now. Honestly my reference to Renee partners words were not in relation to you discussion with the other poster. I did not even see this.

Well, you liked his post.

I just metioned that as one piece of evidence with others that came out later.

Despite that now I have been brought into this particular issue I agree with the other poster. That the confrontation with Renee and her partner was not the first time.

Like I said they belonged to a group whose mission was to make it hard for ICE. Why would you think this was their only encounter.

Why not?

Renees partner mentions that the "don't change their plates every morning". This suggests that they have encountered ICE officers on other mornings. If it was the first time they had protested then there will be no 'other mornings". So why say it.

Because there are clips and reports of ICE changing plates. It is in relation to ICE is changing plates. And that Renee and her wife didn't, in contrast to ICE.

Minnesota DVS warns ICE agents they’re violating state law by switching license plates

The director of Minnesota’s Driver and Vehicle Services told federal homeland security officials to stop license plate switching immediately. Gov. Tim Walz called tampering with plates “criminal activity.”

www.mprnews.org

Illinois officials warn rental car companies that it is illegal for immigration agents to swap license plates

The secretary of state sent a cease and desist letter to ICE head Todd Lyons, citing “multiple reports of federal ICE agents illegally swapping out the license plates displayed on vehicles.”

www.nbcnews.com

Illinois warns immigration officers tampering with license plates is illegal

Hotline introduced to report on agents’ vehicles after one said plates were changed every day in video

www.theguardian.com

She said these will be the same plates when they meet that afternoon. She is telling everyone that they are going to do the same that day.

That is not what she is saying, she says the plate will be the same when ICE comes and talk to them later. So "She is telling everyone that they are going to do the same that day." is straight up false. Why are you straight up twisting the what she said?

This shows it was not about a one off protest. This was an ongoing agitation and making it hard for law enforcement officers to do their job. Which is a crime in itself.

This is your interpretation based on something she NOT did say.

Saying that the number plates will be the same every morning suggests they are going out every morning. Shes saying 'don't worry if you see us each morning the number plate will be the same. So you don't have to keep checking it'.

Quotation marks around a falsehood? Are you joking? That's not what she said again. What video are you watching?

She suggests the same again when she says "the number plates will be the same when you stop us later that day".

No, when ICE comes and talk to them later them. Not "stop". There is no implication that they will keep doing it the same day.

They are admitting they have done this more than once.

Where?

They are admitting they will be doing the same later that day.

Where? Not, in the video I linked. When ICE comes to talk to them later, implies when ICE seek them out, not the other way around.

The actual words from Renee's wife Rebecca Nicole Good. In the transcript and video above.

Give me the video you working from then, because your commentary doesn't match the video I posted. Don't twist her words.

 

[Hans Blaster]

I think you are not getting my point as well. You are using this anonymous and sketchy source to claim that my source is wrong. Who says your source is correct. Most of the so called anonymous sources are proven false.

They are ananymous for the very fact that no one can verify them. A report claims an anonymous sources said this or that. Thats how fake news gets spread.

So here we have a direct sourced that is identified. As opposed to a shady anonymous source and you can't verify whether its actual fact.

You really don't read things carefully, do you? Trace back this interaction.

I've been very explicit in this exchange. The anonymous source I have been speaking of (which is the source of *YOUR* usage of the claim) was an anonymous DHS/ICE source to CBS News that made the "internal bleeding" claim that you repeated.

 

[stevevw]

That is not obvious. Is there any reports of any previous encounters?

Only in news reports. Its early days. But they belonged to a group who were organised to actively disrupt ICE. Do you think this was their only time.

Well, you liked his post.

View attachment 375566

Do you mean 'Like' his post. I can't remember if I said something. I know I agreed with him. But that was not related to my point with Hans. I was speaking about how Hans was claiming certain anonymous facts. Questioning why the report of internal bleeding had not come out officially.

I was saying other facts did not come out straight away either. Like the transcript of what Renee and her partner had said. But not just that. I used a couple of examples. It was not specifically about what Renees partner said. Until it was made about that and then I came in on that.

It seems a communication breakdown. I was coming in on someone elses post not fully realising what the discussion was previously about.

Why not?

Ah because they belonged to a group whose mission it was to make it hard for ICE lol. Its there in the mission of the group. The groups works in a way that whenever ICE agents are identified in the area then group members are notified to then go out and help protect the community.

That would mean every time ICE are in the area group members come out to protest. More than once. Unless you think that a single protest would be enough. They would need to be going to every single case where ICE agents are in the area.

Because there are clips and reports of ICE changing plates. It is in relation to ICE is changing plates. And that Renee and her wife didn't, in contrast to ICE.

Minnesota DVS warns ICE agents they’re violating state law by switching license plates

The director of Minnesota’s Driver and Vehicle Services told federal homeland security officials to stop license plate switching immediately. Gov. Tim Walz called tampering with plates “criminal activity.”

www.mprnews.org

Illinois officials warn rental car companies that it is illegal for immigration agents to swap license plates

The secretary of state sent a cease and desist letter to ICE head Todd Lyons, citing “multiple reports of federal ICE agents illegally swapping out the license plates displayed on vehicles.”

www.nbcnews.com

Illinois warns immigration officers tampering with license plates is illegal

Hotline introduced to report on agents’ vehicles after one said plates were changed every day in video

www.theguardian.com

Ok so that is new info for me. Which shows I was not following the discussion earlier on this. I should have got up to date with it. Sorry about that.

Nevertheless I don't think this is relevant as to whether Rebecca was revealing that this encounter was not the first time or the last. It doesn't matter if she was referring to ICE agents swapping their number plates.

The important point is Rebecca was inferring that they were going to be out and about that afternoon doing the same. She says 'the plates' will be the same this afternoon when you check them'. Inferring they will meet again that afternoon.

That is not what she is saying, she says the plate will be the same when ICE comes and talk to them later. So "She is telling everyone that they are going to do the same that day." is straight up false. Why are you straight up twisting the what she said?

So what did Rebecca mean when she said 'later' ? Was that later regarding the same incident they were in at the time. Or later as in a seperate encounter later that day they may have. To remind them that each time they see them their plates will always be the same.

What did Rebecca mean when she said "we don't change our plates every morning" ? Why say every morning ?

Anyway all this is irrelevant. They belonged to an organised group whose aim was to be present to stop every ICE agent in their area. Considering that has happened many times. Do you honestly believe this was their only time they went out to protest.

This is your interpretation based on something she NOT did say.

Ok fair enough. Yes its an interpretation like all views are at the moment. There are bits and pieces of info and its hard to piece things together.

All I will say is based on probabilities someone who joins a specific activist group to stop ICE will be actively involved in protesting against ICE when they come into their area.

Quotation marks around a falsehood? Are you joking? That's not what she said again. What video are you watching?

It seems an interpretation others are coming to as well. I agree trying to work out what is going on by certain statements is not enough. There needs to be more evidence. More information. I am sure they would have info on whether there were other occassions.

No, when ICE comes and talk to them later them. Not "stop". There is no implication that they will keep doing it the same day.

But then theres no indication they won't or have not. Its too hard to tell.

So you think this was their first time ?

Where?

Based on saying that their plates will always be the same whenever they see them. Why say it otherwise.

Where? Not, in the video I linked. When ICE comes to talk to them later, implies when ICE seek them out, not the other way around.

What do you mean seek them out. At their homes or when they are protesting again.

Give me the video you working from then, because your commentary doesn't match the video I posted. Don't twist her words.

I have but evidently there is more than one interpretation. I was agreeing with the other poster on his interpretation. So its not as if this interpretation is a reasonable interpretation. Two independent people coming to the same interpretation.

But I reserve my judgement. I don't want to base the truth on a short quote. More evidence is needed.

But in the meantime I keep coming back to why its not a reasonable conclusion that activists belonging to a group that aims to stop ICE would not go out more than once. If ICE is often in their area. I think the idea is to keep protesting over and over again and not just once.

 

[stevevw]

You really don't read things carefully, do you? Trace back this interaction.

I've been very explicit in this exchange. The anonymous source I have been speaking of (which is the source of *YOUR* usage of the claim) was an anonymous DHS/ICE source to CBS News that made the "internal bleeding" claim that you repeated.

Whatever. The point was about Ross being seen at the hospital. That came directly from Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem. Like I said I have a direct statement for the DHS/ICE Secretary and another from an anonymous source from the same department.

As far as I know a direct claim from the Secretary is not anonymous but an explicit statement to the facts. Who am I to believe.

In fact none of this supports any claim that Ross did not have internal bleeding or that he was not taken to a hospital to be checked. All this is to make out that there was no incident. Ross was not in danger and murdered Good. This is exactly what you have been suggesting all along.

 

[BPPLEE]

Only in news reports. Its early days. But they belonged to a group who were organised to actively disrupt ICE. Do you think this was their only time.

Do you mean 'Like' his post. I can't remember if I said something. I know I agreed with him. But that was not related to my point with Hans. I was speaking about how Hans was claiming certain anonymous facts. Questioning why the report of internal bleeding had not come out officially.

I was saying other facts did not come out straight away either. Like the transcript of what Renee and her partner had said. But not just that. I used a couple of examples. It was not specifically about what Renees partner said. Until it was made about that and then I came in on that.

It seems a communication breakdown. I was coming in on someone elses post not fully realising what the discussion was previously about.

Ah because they belonged to a group whose mission it was to make it hard for ICE lol. Its there in the mission of the group. The groups works in a way that whenever ICE agents are identified in the area then group members are notified to then go out and help protect the community.

That would mean every time ICE are in the area group members come out to protest. More than once. Unless you think that a single protest would be enough. They would need to be going to every single case where ICE agents are in the area.

Ok so that is new info for me. Which shows I was not following the discussion earlier on this. I should have got up to date with it. Sorry about that.

Nevertheless I don't think this is relevant as to whether Rebecca was revealing that this encounter was not the first time or the last. It doesn't matter if she was referring to ICE agents swapping their number plates.

The important point is Rebecca was inferring that they were going to be out and about that afternoon doing the same. She says 'the plates' will be the same this afternoon when you check them'. Inferring they will meet again that afternoon.

So what did Rebecca mean when she said 'later' ? Was that later regarding the same incident they were in at the time. Or later as in a seperate encounter later that day they may have. To remind them that each time they see them their plates will always be the same.

What did Rebecca mean when she said "we don't change our plates every morning" ? Why say every morning ?

Anyway all this is irrelevant. They belonged to an organised group whose aim was to be present to stop every ICE agent in their area. Considering that has happened many times. Do you honestly believe this was their only time they went out to protest.

Ok fair enough. Yes its an interpretation like all views are at the moment. There are bits and pieces of info and its hard to piece things together.

All I will say is based on probabilities someone who joins a specific activist group to stop ICE will be actively involved in protesting against ICE when they come into their area.

It seems an interpretation others are coming to as well. I agree trying to work out what is going on by certain statements is not enough. There needs to be more evidence. More information. I am sure they would have info on whether there were other occassions.

But then theres no indication they won't or have not. Its too hard to tell.

So you think this was their first time ?

Based on saying that their plates will always be the same whenever they see them. Why say it otherwise.

What do you mean seek them out. At their homes or when they are protesting again.

I have but evidently there is more than one interpretation. I was agreeing with the other poster on his interpretation. So its not as if this interpretation is a reasonable interpretation. Two independent people coming to the same interpretation.

But I reserve my judgement. I don't want to base the truth on a short quote. More evidence is needed.

But in the meantime I keep coming back to why its not a reasonable conclusion that activists belonging to a group that aims to stop ICE would not go out more than once. If ICE is often in their area. I think the idea is to keep protesting over and over again and not just once.

I still wonder why Good’s wife has not released her cellphone video.

 

[Stopped_lurking]

Only in news reports. Its early days. But they belonged to a group who were organised to actively disrupt ICE. Do you think this was their only time.

Do you mean 'Like' his post. I can't remember if I said something. I know I agreed with him. But that was not related to my point with Hans. I was speaking about how Hans was claiming certain anonymous facts. Questioning why the report of internal bleeding had not come out officially.

I was saying other facts did not come out straight away either. Like the transcript of what Renee and her partner had said. But not just that. I used a couple of examples. It was not specifically about what Renees partner said. Until it was made about that and then I came in on that.

It seems a communication breakdown. I was coming in on someone elses post not fully realising what the discussion was previously about.

Ah because they belonged to a group whose mission it was to make it hard for ICE lol. Its there in the mission of the group. The groups works in a way that whenever ICE agents are identified in the area then group members are notified to then go out and help protect the community.

That would mean every time ICE are in the area group members come out to protest. More than once. Unless you think that a single protest would be enough. They would need to be going to every single case where ICE agents are in the area.

Ok so that is new info for me. Which shows I was not following the discussion earlier on this. I should have got up to date with it. Sorry about that.

Nevertheless I don't think this is relevant as to whether Rebecca was revealing that this encounter was not the first time or the last. It doesn't matter if she was referring to ICE agents swapping their number plates.

The important point is Rebecca was inferring that they were going to be out and about that afternoon doing the same.
She says 'the plates' will be the same this afternoon when you check them'. Inferring they will meet again that afternoon.

She never said that "they were going to be out and about that afternoon doing the same." She said that plates will be the same when ICE comes to talk with them later. Your statement is not what she said. And you put it in quotes again, why do you put it quotes if you don't plan to actually present quotes? This is tantamount to lying.

So what did Rebecca mean when she said 'later' ?

That ICE would come and visit them perhaps?

Was that later regarding the same incident they were in at the time. Or later as in a seperate encounter later that day they may have. To remind them that each time they see them their plates will always be the same.

How about ICE comes an visit them later as an explanation.

What did Rebecca mean when she said "we don't change our plates every morning" ? Why say every morning ?

Anyway all this is irrelevant. They belonged to an organised group whose aim was to be present to stop every ICE agent in their area. Considering that has happened many times. Do you honestly believe this was their only time they went out to protest.

Yes, I don't believe you have showed that they planned to go out and protest later.

Ok fair enough. Yes its an interpretation like all views are at the moment. There are bits and pieces of info and its hard to piece things together.

All I will say is based on probabilities someone who joins a specific activist group to stop ICE will be actively involved in protesting against ICE when they come into their area.

It seems an interpretation others are coming to as well. I agree trying to work out what is going on by certain statements is not enough. There needs to be more evidence. More information. I am sure they would have info on whether there were other occassions.

So why did you write your statements then?

But then theres no indication they won't or have not. Its too hard to tell.

So you think this was their first time ?

I have no idea, but I haven't said one way or another.

Based on saying that their plates will always be the same whenever they see them. Why say it otherwise.

Because, it makes fun of ICEs changing of plates.

What do you mean seek them out. At their homes or when they are protesting again.

At their homes or work or whatever.

I have but evidently there is more than one interpretation. I was agreeing with the other poster on his interpretation. So its not as if this interpretation is a reasonable interpretation. Two independent people coming to the same interpretation.

Presenting false quotes, that is not a good look, that is tendentious commentary or straight up lies.

But I reserve my judgement. I don't want to base the truth on a short quote. More evidence is needed.

You have already made statements on the evidence you had at hand. You can't now retreat to more evidence is needed

But in the meantime I keep coming back to why its not a reasonable conclusion that activists belonging to a group that aims to stop ICE would not go out more than once. If ICE is often in their area. I think the idea is to keep protesting over and over again and not just once.

You can think that if you want, but it is not evidenced by the wife's statements.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Whatever.

Your disinterest in the only conversation I have been having with you here is... telling.

The point was about Ross being seen at the hospital. That came directly from Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem. Like I said I have a direct statement for the DHS/ICE Secretary and another from an anonymous source from the same department.

But it didn't. It was anonymous when you made that claim. The anonymous claim came first in one outlet, then another. It is not surprising that the Secretary *confirmed* it when asked at a press conference or something.

As far as I know a direct claim from the Secretary is not anonymous but an explicit statement to the facts. Who am I to believe.

Frankly, HHS Secretary Noem and her spokesperson McWhatever, are prolific prevaricators. Again, the normal way to do this is to put out a press release with quotes from named doctors at the hospital or at a press report (often with the doctors) while the agent recovers in the hospital. Actual "internal bleeding" that is not just a bruise is quite life threatening and serious. Nothing about this claim has indicated they act like it is serious.

In fact none of this supports any claim that Ross did not have internal bleeding or that he was not taken to a hospital to be checked. All this is to make out that there was no incident. Ross was not in danger and murdered Good. This is exactly what you have been suggesting all along.

 

[Vanellus]

Yeah, they were driving around her because she parked her car in the middle of the road, perpendicularly, which is an offence in Minnesota.

It’s clear she was obstructing traffic by all the car horns honking at her, which in turn impeded ICE from working.

The ICE officer who was hit by her car thought so.

Hmm quite a redefinition of the word "middle" - maybe it's an alternative middle.

As you can see Renee Good's car is between the broken line which marks the middle of the road for car traffic and the edge of the road. The car isn't straddling this centre line so it is not in the middle of the road as you falsely asserted. Note that the road is one way. No cars were blocked and so there was no impeding of anyone.

Only one horn is heard honking repeatedly in the twitter video and the movements of the camera seem to indicate more interest in what is happening further up the road in a rightwards direction.

Standard police procedure in Minnesota and elsewhere is that police should not place themselves in front of a vehicle (Ross was at front left by the headlight when Good pulled away) and that in such cases one should step out of the way not shoot the driver. Good had already stated her intention to "pull out" just before the two other ICE agents approached her aggressively. Ross was seen to be walking normally afterwards and drove himself away.

 

[GoldenBoy89]

Idk why people are still trying to defend Ross’s actions when even Trump can see and point out ICE made a mistake here and that her death was a tragedy.