patrick.net

https://x.com/naomirwolf/status/2009760622427418921

Okay, I’ll just say it. I’ve seen enough videos of the faces of liberal white women in conflict with ICE, to know what is up. Liberal men at this point (sorry) are disproportionately estrogenized, physically passive, submissive due to woke gender hectoring, or porn-addicted. White liberal women are disproportionately sexually frustrated. Policing others as in the pandemic was an outlet for them, but it was not nearly enough. The smiles you see on their faces now say it all: white women long for all out combat with ICE - who tend to be strong, physically confident, masculine men - because the conflict is a form of physical release for them. They long for actual kinetic battle and it will get even uglier.

Her wife, Rebecca Good, can be heard taunting the agent, urging him to “show his face” and challenging him verbally as she records the encounter on her phone.

As tensions rose, federal agents ordered Good multiple times to exit her vehicle.

According to the footage, she ignored those commands.

Instead, she began revving the engine and then accelerated forward toward Ross as he stood in front of her vehicle.

Ross’s camera jolts abruptly at that moment, as he was struck while trying to jump out of the way.

The ICE agent swiftly responds by firing three shots, including one through the vehicle’s windshield. ...

Additional surveillance video released earlier shows that Good had positioned her SUV in the roadway for several minutes, partially blocking traffic during an ongoing immigration enforcement operation.

The footage also shows multiple federal agents surrounding the vehicle and attempting to gain compliance before the shooting occurred.

The shooter is cooked: a video from different angle show that he was't in the path of the vehicle when he started firing. This is very similar to the Ashly Babbit situation.

The shooter is cooked: a video from different angle show that he was't in the path of the vehicle when he started firing. This is very similar to the Ashly Babbit situation.

Renée and her lesbian partner, Becca Good, were activists in the “ICE Watch” protest movement. Among other things, ICE watchers obstruct ICE officers and film their activities for social media clout. Alas, it seems that the unscathed Becca was the primary enthusiast and that her dead partner was merely along for the ride. In this screen grab, Becca taunts Ross …

… seconds before urging Renée to “drive, baby drive” when agents order Renée to get out of her car – a command to flee that precipitated Renée’s death.

At the time of the shooting, both Goods were taking part in one of the most popular and widely advertised ICE watcher activities, namely blocking ICE vehicles on public roadways. This is a trend all across the United States right now. Hundreds if not thousands of freaked out suburbanites, by the looks of it mostly plump middle-aged women, now spend their afternoons stalking ICE convoys in their cars and filming the resulting encounters on their mobile phones. They believe that doing this is necessary to stop National Socialism. Some of them literally claim this, I’m not making it up.

The most instructive moment in this clip (again, one of dozens) comes right at the beginning, when our heroine tells the ICE agents whose car she is blocking that “We can play” because “my car’s bigger than yours.” This random woman who probably has kids in school and a mortgage and a miserable ex-husband on the hook for god knows how much in child support thus openly contemplates weaponising her vehicle against multiple armed law enforcement officers. That level of middle-class political radicalisation is pretty amazing if you ask me. ...

Objectively speaking, these ICE-watching women engage federal law enforcement officers in repeated rounds of chicken. Their aim is to edge beyond being a mere nuisance and cause meaningful disruptions, while hoping always to stop short of becoming a serious, actionable threat. This is a very hard balance to maintain because of course threats are perceived subjectively. Where exactly the line falls will vary from officer to officer and from situation to situation, according to a multitude of imponderables. Anyone who plays like this is trying to get shot, whether she realises it or not.

What makes this balance even harder to maintain, is the fact that none of the politically hysterical imbeciles involved shows any evidence of understanding what it is she’s doing. Most of these women give the strong impression of being really naive and stupid, and like all lefty activists in the age of social media, they have only the registers of shallow mockery and victimised outrage. You can see this in the Good shooting video; before the bullets fly it’s all fun and games. As the officer films Renée’s car, presumably for invesetigative purposes, she says “That’s fine dude” and in feigned innocence adds “I’m not mad,” while her partner Becca tells him to “go get yourself some lunch.” After the shooting, the activists discover their victim register and begin their outraged screaming about how the ICE agents are “criminals” who “did a murder.” It’s nothing but clownery from start to finish.

It’s easy to larp as a revolutionary, as someone who stands against oppression. There’s a lack of seriousness about it all. ...

You start to believe you’re a hero, you’re the main character. Then you convince yourself to do something really dumb, like pull your car in front of police officers. They draw their guns and the larp crumbles, you’re not that person, this is real life and those are real guns. ...

No one in this woman’s life told her she’s on a retarded destructive larp. She was encouraged by her peer group. Viral videos of similarly lost radical larpers getting nothing but praise online. Politicians calling the enforcement of our laws akin to Nazis, calling them illegitimate, calling them evil. Telling their citizens to make their voices heard. Everyone in her life failed her. She needed someone to tell her to grow up. Instead she had no one and now she’s dead.

There was an earlier video of a woman in the PNW of a woman doing something similar with ICE then weeping when she was caught and he let her go - there have been similar videos of "the resistance" doing things like this for months and always getting handled with kid gloves. This isn't the first such incident - this type of thing has been going on for months

Lefties coordinate and reverse engineer the rules of engagement to attempt to provoke something that they can make videos about so they can "justify" a reaction - "kick the dog until it bites, then shoot it" but they're also emotional and believe themselves in the right and so in the heat of the moment a particularly emotional leftist - a woman, a criminal will respond with emotional violence

You saw this with Kyle Rittenhouse - multiple people attempted to kill him even after the first one who attacked Kyle was shot and killed by Kyle

Their only reaction to being defied is escalation

This woman was told that ICE is the gestapo, that Trump is a fascist, etc. etc.; her mind is bathed in some of the stupidest propaganda of all time about how her righteous anger makes her strong, about how women's constant restraint in the face of provocation proves that when she has a strong emotional reaction she should always act on it - she's been rewarded since childhood for escalating so what does she do in a key moment? Escalates and gets herself killed

Here's the thing though - everyone who was involved in getting her killed - all her "friends" - all the people that helped create that psychologically comforting rage that she could feel rather than thinking at all about her own life - they're all thrilled about her getting killed. The woman filming this doesn't care, she just wants to shriek about how she was "murdered" (when she witnessed what was very much not a murder)

Why? Because it's bloody shirt to wave so when the left tries to release an orgy of violence like they did in 2020 normies aren't willing to look too closely - it's a permission structure for normies to keep their heads down and not notice how deranged and dangerous the left is - "oh, they were provoked"

Drip feed the emotional triggers into the culture and wait for the inevitable to happen...

https://x.com/memeticsisyphus/status/2009057994655301739

It’s easy to larp as a revolutionary, as someone who stands against oppression. There’s a lack of seriousness about it all. ...

You start to believe you’re a hero, you’re the main character. Then you convince yourself to do something really dumb, like pull your car in front of police officers. They draw their guns and the larp crumbles, you’re not that person, this is real life and those are real guns. ...

No one in this woman’s life told her she’s on a retarded destructive larp. She was encouraged by her peer group. Viral videos of similarly lost radical larpers getting nothing but praise online. Politicians calling the enforcement of our laws akin to Nazis, calling them illegitimate, calling them evil. Telling their citizens to make their voices heard. Everyone in her life failed her. She needed someone to tell her to grow up. Instead she had no one and now she’s dead.

Yep Naomi is 100% correct. Western men have been neutered so the womyn engage in violence and sex fantasies with illegal invaders of cultured where womyn are subdued. It's not complicated, sex is always better after a fight, it's innate biology and that's fine within your marriage, but Western womyn, abdicated of any and all responsibility, are looking for real danger. She got the danger she was looking for.

Notwithstanding the provisions of section 609.06 or 609.065, the use of deadly force by a peace officer in the line of duty is justified only if an objectively reasonable officer would believe, based on the totality of the circumstances known to the officer at the time and without the benefit of hindsight, that such force is necessary:
(1) to protect the peace officer or another from death or great bodily harm, provided that the threat:

(i) can be articulated with specificity;

(ii) is reasonably likely to occur absent action by the law enforcement officer; and

(iii) must be addressed through the use of deadly force without unreasonable delay; or

(2) to effect the arrest or capture, or prevent the escape, of a person whom the peace officer knows or has reasonable grounds to believe has committed or attempted to commit a felony and the officer reasonably believes that the person will cause death or great bodily harm to another person under the threat criteria in clause (1), items (i) to (iii), unless immediately apprehended.

renee good was not an “innocent bystander” on some innocent daily task and set upon needlessly by federal officers. that (widely disseminated) narrative is in tatters.

she’s a woman with a deeply checkered past who lost custody of two of her kids because her wife was a serial child abuser. she’s hyper politicized and was a member of an anti-ICE activist group organized around her child’s school, a “social justice” charter school that seems to raise a lot of red flags. you can read more on that HERE:

https://nypost.com/2026/01/09/us-news/renee-goods-kindergarten-son-attends-social-justice-school-that-teaches-about-george-floyd-warned-staffers-to-report-ice/

she was actively engaged in harassing ICE when the incident occurred and had chosen to block to road, blocking in a vehicle, and her passenger had jumped out of the car and was filming and being verbally aggressive to officers.

officers stopped and approached her vehicle from multiple sides. she was in no doubt that they were officers, she had been speaking to them, they were in uniform, there is no “she did not know who they were” story that holds water. she was smugly dismissing them.

the original video released had a tricky angle to read as to whether or not she tried to run over an officer or if he was off to the side of her truck. many claimed the officer shot her through her side window. for at least the first shot, this is clearly not true.

the shooter was right handed and the shot went through the windshield.

you can see the position here from a video still. white circle mine. note that the wheels are pointed right at him.




i’m not quite sure we can say “she tried to kill him” as we do not know her mental state or intent and it could also be just reckless, bad decisions, but this video shows two things i find telling:

when she backed up, that’s what put the cop in front of the vehicle

with him in front of the vehicle she hits the gas. the fact that the wheels spun on ice may have actually saved the officer’s life (ice saves ICE?)

if you were this officer and, while in the process of evading arrest, a woman you have seen acting aggressively and recklessly backs up her truck to point it at you and then you see the front wheels spin out as she hits the gas while you are right in front of it and you have a split second to make a choice, where does your mind go?

“oh, she probably doesn’t mean it?”

i know a lot of people don’t like this, but this was a good shoot. it’s an unfortunate situation, maybe she didn’t intend to kill him, but a car is a lethal weapon. ...

eventually, the dice are going to come up against you.

this is all just more of the “hang your enemy upon the horns of a dilemma” agitprop.

there is a reason that all these "ICE watch activists" are mostly women.

it's being done on purpose to make arresting and resisting them look bad.

the whole point is that women can bully agents in a way that men cannot and then fall back on "OMG, he hit a girl! poor defenseless her!"

it's a technique taught to activists.

you put the old lady and the priest in the front row then kick the dog in front of you until it bites someone.

then the whole story is "evil dog bites defenseless lady! how terrible!"

this is as contrived as it is amoral.

this is not “grass roots.”

the people running this are professionals.

this is all about optics and "playing to the audience who isn't there."

it's a media event, the manufacture of video bites by creating dangerous, aggressive situations that have no reasonable resolution and then screaming "unreasonable!" if anyone tries to resolve them.

the core to resolving this is to stop caring. lose the sympathy for these people and the harm they court for themselves. that sounds brutal, but really stop and think about it:

who is really responsible for these bad outcomes, the people who "do a bad thing" because they were cornered into dangerous and aggressive situations by activists, or the activists who are deliberately creating dangerous situations so they can make media hay with the outcomes?

this was the whole point of flooding the US with illegals for welfare and benefits plunder and political power.

it's an incredibly unreasonable act that cannot be remedied without the kind of aggressive response that it's easy to vilify.

it was created for that reason and it's being resisted to protect a political faction whose whole foundation is electoral fraud and society scale theft. ...

and when you play stupid games, you win stupid prizes.




it’s being managed like an insurgency in the same city that keeps spawning these (and whose governor and congressional rep (this took place in omar’s district) both look like they’re about to get indicted for massive corruption around immigrants they flooded the area with to sway voting.)

it’s more than a little curious how these folks were all so ready for this within hours.

Portland Chief Confirms Gang Ties in Border Patrol Shooting

A Border Patrol agent shot two people during a targeted vehicle stop in Southeast Portland on Thursday afternoon after the driver allegedly attempted to ram officers. Portland Police Chief Bob Day confirmed Friday that both Luis David Nino-Moncada and Yorlenys Betzabeth Zambrano-Contreras have ties to the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua.

Why it matters: The incident has intensified national debate over federal immigration enforcement and use of force, sparking protests at Portland's ICE facility with six arrests. Federal officials report dramatic increases in threats against officers, including an 8,000% rise in death threats and 3,200% increase in vehicle ramming attacks.

RWSGFY says

The shooter is cooked: a video from different angle show that he was't in the path of the vehicle when he started firing. This is very similar to the Ashly Babbit situation.

Do you deliberately lie when posting here?

RWSGFY says

The shooter is cooked: a video from different angle show that he was't in the path of the vehicle when he started firing. This is very similar to the Ashly Babbit situation.

Do you deliberately lie when posting here?

Democrats continually lie. Including multiple members of Congress.

This is one of the most interesting responses I got to the law enforcement post. I have his identity. But he needs to stay anonymous. READ IT ALL.

“I am a current ICE Use of Force Instructor with over a decade of federal law enforcement experience as well as nearly two decades of military experience. I can tell you the situation is "lawful but awful" because it is justified, but it's awful for a lot of reasons (i.e. she didn't need to try to drive through, she was 5 hrs from home allegedly and engaged in protesting, etc).

He is also a firearms instructor, a field intelligence officer (both in Border Patrol and now in ICE), and he is also a field intelligence officer and assigned to the FBI Joint Terrorism Task Force - he is a VERY experienced officer.

ICE use of force policy does state what others have been arguing that he cannot create a danger. however, they had stopped her and were attempting to take her out of the vehicle and place her in custody for a violation of 18USC111.

ICEemployees are designated as "immigration officers" And are therefore conferred legal authorities under 8 USC 1357 for the purpose of arrest. a1-a4 relate specifically to aliens, A5 (A) &(B) relates to ANYONE. So ICE absolutely had the ability to stop and detain her.

She speaks clear English as indicated by the video, so there's no reason to believe that she couldn't understand the instructions that she was given.

The passenger was allowed to get out of the vehicle and start filming which indicates either: A potential trap for law enforcement, or B an agitator looking for reaction. the vehicle was parked perpendicular to the roadway with an ice vehicle in front of and behind. the position of the vehicle indicates that what the agents told was true that she was following, trying to insert her car between agents, attempting to block them, etc. That becomes dangerous, because what is the reason for doing so? is it a drop for law enforcement? is it just harassing conduct, officers don't know, but it is intimidating conduct which is also covered by 18 USC 111.

She was ordered to exit the vehicle, which law enforcement officers are authorized to do under Pennsylvania v Mimms and officers attempted to remove her from the vehicle, at that point she backed the vehicle up indicating a lack of compliance. at that point he crosses in front of the vehicle. here is the rub, he could have been crossing to move to support his team mate. we don't know, we don't have any intent. As an aside, good on him for having a camera rolling, especially if he didn't have a body cam.

Now when I heard the drive baby drive comment, Yes her steering wheel was locked to the right but you can only tell that if you were from the side of the vehicle and could see how far the tires had turned where he could not from his viewpoint.

Drive baby drive being said when an officer is in front shows a lack of regard for safety, and the officer may have felt that was a trap to try to run him over. That would be serious bodily injury or death, and use of force is not a 50/50 proposition where I have to meet your force with an equal but opposite force, I can use the minimum amount of force necessary to stop your actions. When a vehicle is weaponized, it increases the likelihood of deadly force utilization. many are also interpreting ice policy incorrectly when they say that ice policy says that you won't shoot at moving vehicles. What it's saying is that you cannot shoot at a moving vehicle to "disable the vehicle". However, if you shoot at the driver to stop a threat that is legitimate use of force. We don't shoot at tires because they move and because they don't actually stop the threat plus a 9mm may not penetrate certain parts of the cabin, or may over penetrate tires, so it would be an unnecessary risk.

Now, in the totality of circumstances - we have ICE enforcing the law on others or generally existing. An uninvolved party from out of town comes to the ICE operation, begins harassing conduct, continues dangerously harassing conduct against officers for blocks, somehow cuts them off and positions their vehicle (seemingly to prevent travel), issued commands to get out in a language she does understand, she refuses through her actions, officers attempt to take her out of the vehicle, she actively resists by moving the vehicle and pulling her arm away. The officer in front sees this go down, (I would have thought that she was going to injure the other officers) prompting the officer to draw, "drive baby drive" is said, she starts going forward, deadly force is utilized. I would reasonably think that by her continuing to drive that she posed a continuing threat to law enforcement given the violent nature of the previous harassing conduct, the violent active resistance to detention/arrest immediately preceding the use, and driving through (with her passenger now outside of the vehicle) increasing the likelihood of another violent conflict.

Lastly, let's take a moment to talk about how his experience informs the use of force. He's in Minnesota, stationed in Minnesota. He's not an outsider. So he knows what is "normal conduct" for the area. He is aware of the current tactics by protesters in Minnesota including the violent mob tactics and the use of vehicles in dangerous manners to assault, resist, impede, or intimidate ICE. That experience plays a significant factor in the perception of the subject's actions. Now add to that the officers experience being dragged, where he now sees the officer attempting to extract the subject doing so while the subject seems to drive away. He knows that can result in serious bodily injury or death.

Is it awful? 100%. I know of absolutely no one that wakes up looking to shoot someone. I wish I never have to use a firearm and i've only drawn it two times (once off duty) and taken the slack out of the trigger once. It would put a pit in anyone's stomach that they committed the most permanent seizure and took someone's life over something the subject could have and should have avoided.”

Ha, I knew I wasn't crazy, thanks for the Naomi quote, mell and patrick.

"She will want to be over the man, but shall not" - Book of Genesis, Curse of Eve.

English Standard Version
To the woman he said, “I will surely multiply your pain in childbearing; in pain you shall bring forth children. Your desire shall be contrary to your husband, but he shall rule over you.”

King James Bible
Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.

No. Watch the video from rear quarter of the car: the wheel was clear of the shooter and moving further right, away from him. He was never in the path.This is the only angle that matters and in a jury trial it will seal the deal.