ICE Shooting in Minneapolis

[Anonymous]

The video(s) I saw show him being assaulted with a vehicle.

Nobody cares.

Are you the prosecutor in Hennepin County?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here is what will happen.

The US Attorney will decline to indict.

Minnesota will indict. The US Attorney will invoke the federal officer removal statute and will then dismiss the charges. Alternatively, Ross will have it removed.

2029. New president. Ross will be fired. Minnesota will revitalize the murder charges against Ross. Ross will try to remove. But, Mark Meadows already tried this, invoking the statute AFTER your term as a federal officer is over, and was shot down by the 11th Circuit and the US Supreme Court declined to hear the appeal, letting the 11th Circuit decision stand.

Ross will then face charges before a jury of his Minnesota peers and will have an opportunity to present self-defense as an affirmative defense. He will have the burden of proving that defense and convincing a jury of his peers that his actions were proper.

Then he will either walk free or join Derek Chauvin.

The removal to federal court will stand as an available option indefinitely because the activity in question occurred when the actor was a federal officer engaged in federal law enforcement activity. Local authorities cannot obstruct or second guess such federal activity at the time or any time thereafter. It doesn't matter if a new federal administration eventually appears, or whether the officer eventually retires or changes jobs. What matters is what his status was at the time of the incident.

There’s an argument that shooting in that situation does not represent legitimate law enforcement activity, and that jumping out on a lady because she wasn’t parked the way they’d like also wasn’t legitimate law enforcement activity.

It was legitimate. They were on duty, moving as a convoy- many vehicles and personal. Not only was she clogging the road and obstructing traffic, her vehicle being perpendicular in the road (and taunting/harassing) presents a safety and security risk for their convoy to
pass. It was completely appropriate and legitimate for them to tell her to move and arrest her when she wouldn’t.

They were not on a mission....they were heading back to their HQ and had absolutely no reason to stop at all.

Are you dense? “On duty” doesn’t only imply at a mission in action. They are still on duty while enroute to missions and HQ. They absolutely had legitimate reason to remove her and her vehicle from the middle of the road before passing all their vehicles and agents through.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here is what will happen.

The US Attorney will decline to indict.

Minnesota will indict. The US Attorney will invoke the federal officer removal statute and will then dismiss the charges. Alternatively, Ross will have it removed.

2029. New president. Ross will be fired. Minnesota will revitalize the murder charges against Ross. Ross will try to remove. But, Mark Meadows already tried this, invoking the statute AFTER your term as a federal officer is over, and was shot down by the 11th Circuit and the US Supreme Court declined to hear the appeal, letting the 11th Circuit decision stand.

Ross will then face charges before a jury of his Minnesota peers and will have an opportunity to present self-defense as an affirmative defense. He will have the burden of proving that defense and convincing a jury of his peers that his actions were proper.

Then he will either walk free or join Derek Chauvin.

The removal to federal court will stand as an available option indefinitely because the activity in question occurred when the actor was a federal officer engaged in federal law enforcement activity. Local authorities cannot obstruct or second guess such federal activity at the time or any time thereafter. It doesn't matter if a new federal administration eventually appears, or whether the officer eventually retires or changes jobs. What matters is what his status was at the time of the incident.

There’s an argument that shooting in that situation does not represent legitimate law enforcement activity, and that jumping out on a lady because she wasn’t parked the way they’d like also wasn’t legitimate law enforcement activity.

It was legitimate. They were on duty, moving as a convoy- many vehicles and personal. Not only was she clogging the road and obstructing traffic, her vehicle being perpendicular in the road (and taunting/harassing) presents a safety and security risk for their convoy to
pass. It was completely appropriate and legitimate for them to tell her to move and arrest her when she wouldn’t.

They were not on a mission....they were heading back to their HQ and had absolutely no reason to stop at all.

Are you dense? “On duty” doesn’t only imply at a mission in action. They are still on duty while enroute to missions and HQ. They absolutely had legitimate reason to remove her and her vehicle from the middle of the road before passing all their vehicles and agents through.

Lmao “a mission.”

To Burger King?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here is what will happen.

The US Attorney will decline to indict.

Minnesota will indict. The US Attorney will invoke the federal officer removal statute and will then dismiss the charges. Alternatively, Ross will have it removed.

2029. New president. Ross will be fired. Minnesota will revitalize the murder charges against Ross. Ross will try to remove. But, Mark Meadows already tried this, invoking the statute AFTER your term as a federal officer is over, and was shot down by the 11th Circuit and the US Supreme Court declined to hear the appeal, letting the 11th Circuit decision stand.

Ross will then face charges before a jury of his Minnesota peers and will have an opportunity to present self-defense as an affirmative defense. He will have the burden of proving that defense and convincing a jury of his peers that his actions were proper.

Then he will either walk free or join Derek Chauvin.

The removal to federal court will stand as an available option indefinitely because the activity in question occurred when the actor was a federal officer engaged in federal law enforcement activity. Local authorities cannot obstruct or second guess such federal activity at the time or any time thereafter. It doesn't matter if a new federal administration eventually appears, or whether the officer eventually retires or changes jobs. What matters is what his status was at the time of the incident.

There’s an argument that shooting in that situation does not represent legitimate law enforcement activity, and that jumping out on a lady because she wasn’t parked the way they’d like also wasn’t legitimate law enforcement activity.

It was legitimate. They were on duty, moving as a convoy- many vehicles and personal. Not only was she clogging the road and obstructing traffic, her vehicle being perpendicular in the road (and taunting/harassing) presents a safety and security risk for their convoy to
pass. It was completely appropriate and legitimate for them to tell her to move and arrest her when she wouldn’t.

They were not on a mission....they were heading back to their HQ and had absolutely no reason to stop at all.

Are you dense? “On duty” doesn’t only imply at a mission in action. They are still on duty while enroute to missions and HQ. They absolutely had legitimate reason to remove her and her vehicle from the middle of the road before passing all their vehicles and agents through.

Lmao “a mission.”

To Burger King?

Why was the road being blocked to “Burger King” if they were on a break?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Curious how this incident will play with other Center and Center-Right podcasters. Wonder if Joe Rogan will cover it.

Has it dawned on any of you mouth breathers why Becca Good hasn't released the video footage she took that day? Ya think it might be because it proves Ross right?

I mean, if her video clearly showed him executing an innocent woman just complying with an order to move the vehicle, she'd release it, right?

Hmmmm.

Or…in reality land, perhaps she has been advised by an attorney to keep it to herself until discovery. What makes that especially ironic is that the killer released his cell phone footage that just further proved his guilt.

The video(s) I saw show him being assaulted with a vehicle.

Then you must be looking at the images tagged in SNOPES as being fake.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:r/minnesota recent videos include:

17 yo US citizen hauled away sobbing and tossed into ICE vehicle at Target. Later they dump him off at a Walmart store (apparently quite a ways away). He's bleeding, he says they threw him on the ground. He's still crying. Guy asks him if he's ok "No, I'm not ok."

Of course, he's Hispanic (based on appearance only).
What is the difference between profiling (which was declared legal in the California case) and outright violent targeting of citizens based on race?

He didn’t even have an accent, not that it should matter.

This is a BIG problem. This is a country composed of immigrants, and Hispanics* are the second largest racial/ethnic group after non-Hispanic Whites. How on earth can roving bands of ICE agents NOT commit civil rights abuses as they walk/drive around looking for "illegals" to pick up? They need a better technique to sort out people who are legally here and/or are citizens from those who are not without causing harm. And it can't be based just on appearance and accent--because so many Hispanics are here LEGALLY.


*According to 2020 census data, there are 62.1 million Hispanics living in the United States. This group represents 18.9 percent of the total U.S. population, the nation's second largest racial or ethnic group after non-Hispanic whites.

it's called a warrant. Somehow Biden and Obama were able to do this in numbers greater than either trump administration and without terrorizing the public. I guess MAGA is ok with such rank incompetence that the Trump administration is displaying.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here is what will happen.

The US Attorney will decline to indict.

Minnesota will indict. The US Attorney will invoke the federal officer removal statute and will then dismiss the charges. Alternatively, Ross will have it removed.

2029. New president. Ross will be fired. Minnesota will revitalize the murder charges against Ross. Ross will try to remove. But, Mark Meadows already tried this, invoking the statute AFTER your term as a federal officer is over, and was shot down by the 11th Circuit and the US Supreme Court declined to hear the appeal, letting the 11th Circuit decision stand.

Ross will then face charges before a jury of his Minnesota peers and will have an opportunity to present self-defense as an affirmative defense. He will have the burden of proving that defense and convincing a jury of his peers that his actions were proper.

Then he will either walk free or join Derek Chauvin.

The removal to federal court will stand as an available option indefinitely because the activity in question occurred when the actor was a federal officer engaged in federal law enforcement activity. Local authorities cannot obstruct or second guess such federal activity at the time or any time thereafter. It doesn't matter if a new federal administration eventually appears, or whether the officer eventually retires or changes jobs. What matters is what his status was at the time of the incident.

There’s an argument that shooting in that situation does not represent legitimate law enforcement activity, and that jumping out on a lady because she wasn’t parked the way they’d like also wasn’t legitimate law enforcement activity.

It was legitimate. They were on duty, moving as a convoy- many vehicles and personal. Not only was she clogging the road and obstructing traffic, her vehicle being perpendicular in the road (and taunting/harassing) presents a safety and security risk for their convoy to
pass. It was completely appropriate and legitimate for them to tell her to move and arrest her when she wouldn’t.

They were not on a mission....they were heading back to their HQ and had absolutely no reason to stop at all.

Are you dense? “On duty” doesn’t only imply at a mission in action. They are still on duty while enroute to missions and HQ. They absolutely had legitimate reason to remove her and her vehicle from the middle of the road before passing all their vehicles and agents through.

There is nothing legit about ICE in 2026.

Sincerely,

A majority of the American people and CERTAINLY a majority of Twin Cities residents

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:r/minnesota recent videos include:

17 yo US citizen hauled away sobbing and tossed into ICE vehicle at Target. Later they dump him off at a Walmart store (apparently quite a ways away). He's bleeding, he says they threw him on the ground. He's still crying. Guy asks him if he's ok "No, I'm not ok."

Of course, he's Hispanic (based on appearance only).
What is the difference between profiling (which was declared legal in the California case) and outright violent targeting of citizens based on race?

He didn’t even have an accent, not that it should matter.

This is a BIG problem. This is a country composed of immigrants, and Hispanics* are the second largest racial/ethnic group after non-Hispanic Whites. How on earth can roving bands of ICE agents NOT commit civil rights abuses as they walk/drive around looking for "illegals" to pick up? They need a better technique to sort out people who are legally here and/or are citizens from those who are not without causing harm. And it can't be based just on appearance and accent--because so many Hispanics are here LEGALLY.


*According to 2020 census data, there are 62.1 million Hispanics living in the United States. This group represents 18.9 percent of the total U.S. population, the nation's second largest racial or ethnic group after non-Hispanic whites.

it's called a warrant. Somehow Biden and Obama were able to do this in numbers greater than either trump administration and without terrorizing the public. I guess MAGA is ok with such rank incompetence that the Trump administration is displaying.

Neither Obama, nor Biden essentially stopped the flow of migrants at the border. Both had net gains in immigrant population. For 50 years the immigrant population grew in the U.S., until 2025. The total population declined last year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I think his comment at the end calling Good a “f**king b***” and not trying to provide aid to a dying woman, is all I need to know! Most women have heard that comment, we know exactly that it’s unchecked male rage. His comment perfectly sums up the Trump administrations’ thoughts on women.

it is also interesting that they cut the second and third shots from the officer video. Why?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:r/minnesota recent videos include:

17 yo US citizen hauled away sobbing and tossed into ICE vehicle at Target. Later they dump him off at a Walmart store (apparently quite a ways away). He's bleeding, he says they threw him on the ground. He's still crying. Guy asks him if he's ok "No, I'm not ok."

Of course, he's Hispanic (based on appearance only).
What is the difference between profiling (which was declared legal in the California case) and outright violent targeting of citizens based on race?

He didn’t even have an accent, not that it should matter.

This is a BIG problem. This is a country composed of immigrants, and Hispanics* are the second largest racial/ethnic group after non-Hispanic Whites. How on earth can roving bands of ICE agents NOT commit civil rights abuses as they walk/drive around looking for "illegals" to pick up? They need a better technique to sort out people who are legally here and/or are citizens from those who are not without causing harm. And it can't be based just on appearance and accent--because so many Hispanics are here LEGALLY.


*According to 2020 census data, there are 62.1 million Hispanics living in the United States. This group represents 18.9 percent of the total U.S. population, the nation's second largest racial or ethnic group after non-Hispanic whites.

it's called a warrant. Somehow Biden and Obama were able to do this in numbers greater than either trump administration and without terrorizing the public. I guess MAGA is ok with such rank incompetence that the Trump administration is displaying.

Below is a video that captures how random, irrational, unprofessional, and unAmerican ICE targeting of civilians can be. Please watch to the end. I had never seen this before and was shocked. Young man who is a US citizen and an Iraq war veteran, with a clear American accent, is picked up by ICE, taken into custody, and more… ICE needs a better system.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:r/minnesota recent videos include:

17 yo US citizen hauled away sobbing and tossed into ICE vehicle at Target. Later they dump him off at a Walmart store (apparently quite a ways away). He's bleeding, he says they threw him on the ground. He's still crying. Guy asks him if he's ok "No, I'm not ok."

Of course, he's Hispanic (based on appearance only).
What is the difference between profiling (which was declared legal in the California case) and outright violent targeting of citizens based on race?

He didn’t even have an accent, not that it should matter.

This is a BIG problem. This is a country composed of immigrants, and Hispanics* are the second largest racial/ethnic group after non-Hispanic Whites. How on earth can roving bands of ICE agents NOT commit civil rights abuses as they walk/drive around looking for "illegals" to pick up? They need a better technique to sort out people who are legally here and/or are citizens from those who are not without causing harm. And it can't be based just on appearance and accent--because so many Hispanics are here LEGALLY.


*According to 2020 census data, there are 62.1 million Hispanics living in the United States. This group represents 18.9 percent of the total U.S. population, the nation's second largest racial or ethnic group after non-Hispanic whites.

it's called a warrant. Somehow Biden and Obama were able to do this in numbers greater than either trump administration and without terrorizing the public. I guess MAGA is ok with such rank incompetence that the Trump administration is displaying.

Neither Obama, nor Biden essentially stopped the flow of migrants at the border. Both had net gains in immigrant population. For 50 years the immigrant population grew in the U.S., until 2025. The total population declined last year.

Ok, even if that were real, you think a net loss in immigrants is a good thing?

Nah.

I’d kill for a net loss of MAGAs, though. The immigrants are coming to work, not to be red state leeches.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here is what will happen.

The US Attorney will decline to indict.

Minnesota will indict. The US Attorney will invoke the federal officer removal statute and will then dismiss the charges. Alternatively, Ross will have it removed.

2029. New president. Ross will be fired. Minnesota will revitalize the murder charges against Ross. Ross will try to remove. But, Mark Meadows already tried this, invoking the statute AFTER your term as a federal officer is over, and was shot down by the 11th Circuit and the US Supreme Court declined to hear the appeal, letting the 11th Circuit decision stand.

Ross will then face charges before a jury of his Minnesota peers and will have an opportunity to present self-defense as an affirmative defense. He will have the burden of proving that defense and convincing a jury of his peers that his actions were proper.

Then he will either walk free or join Derek Chauvin.

The removal to federal court will stand as an available option indefinitely because the activity in question occurred when the actor was a federal officer engaged in federal law enforcement activity. Local authorities cannot obstruct or second guess such federal activity at the time or any time thereafter. It doesn't matter if a new federal administration eventually appears, or whether the officer eventually retires or changes jobs. What matters is what his status was at the time of the incident.

There’s an argument that shooting in that situation does not represent legitimate law enforcement activity, and that jumping out on a lady because she wasn’t parked the way they’d like also wasn’t legitimate law enforcement activity.

It was legitimate. They were on duty, moving as a convoy- many vehicles and personal. Not only was she clogging the road and obstructing traffic, her vehicle being perpendicular in the road (and taunting/harassing) presents a safety and security risk for their convoy to
pass. It was completely appropriate and legitimate for them to tell her to move and arrest her when she wouldn’t.

They were not on a mission....they were heading back to their HQ and had absolutely no reason to stop at all.

Are you dense? “On duty” doesn’t only imply at a mission in action. They are still on duty while enroute to missions and HQ. They absolutely had legitimate reason to remove her and her vehicle from the middle of the road before passing all their vehicles and agents through.

they had no reason to pull over. They could have continued on as other vehicles did. Instead, they stopped, approached her and shot and killed her. Absolutely no reason for it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I think his comment at the end calling Good a “f**king b***” and not trying to provide aid to a dying woman, is all I need to know! Most women have heard that comment, we know exactly that it’s unchecked male rage. His comment perfectly sums up the Trump administrations’ thoughts on women.

it is also interesting that they cut the second and third shots from the officer video. Why?

His entire unedited video is still available. The fact that he moved his cell phone from his right to left hand while recording so he can unholster and fire his weapon with his right hand tells you all you need to know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:r/minnesota recent videos include:

17 yo US citizen hauled away sobbing and tossed into ICE vehicle at Target. Later they dump him off at a Walmart store (apparently quite a ways away). He's bleeding, he says they threw him on the ground. He's still crying. Guy asks him if he's ok "No, I'm not ok."

Of course, he's Hispanic (based on appearance only).
What is the difference between profiling (which was declared legal in the California case) and outright violent targeting of citizens based on race?

He didn’t even have an accent, not that it should matter.

This is a BIG problem. This is a country composed of immigrants, and Hispanics* are the second largest racial/ethnic group after non-Hispanic Whites. How on earth can roving bands of ICE agents NOT commit civil rights abuses as they walk/drive around looking for "illegals" to pick up? They need a better technique to sort out people who are legally here and/or are citizens from those who are not without causing harm. And it can't be based just on appearance and accent--because so many Hispanics are here LEGALLY.


*According to 2020 census data, there are 62.1 million Hispanics living in the United States. This group represents 18.9 percent of the total U.S. population, the nation's second largest racial or ethnic group after non-Hispanic whites.

it's called a warrant. Somehow Biden and Obama were able to do this in numbers greater than either trump administration and without terrorizing the public. I guess MAGA is ok with such rank incompetence that the Trump administration is displaying.

Neither Obama, nor Biden essentially stopped the flow of migrants at the border. Both had net gains in immigrant population. For 50 years the immigrant population grew in the U.S., until 2025. The total population declined last year.

Uh, there has been positive immigrant population growth in the US since...its founding.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here is what will happen.

The US Attorney will decline to indict.

Minnesota will indict. The US Attorney will invoke the federal officer removal statute and will then dismiss the charges. Alternatively, Ross will have it removed.

2029. New president. Ross will be fired. Minnesota will revitalize the murder charges against Ross. Ross will try to remove. But, Mark Meadows already tried this, invoking the statute AFTER your term as a federal officer is over, and was shot down by the 11th Circuit and the US Supreme Court declined to hear the appeal, letting the 11th Circuit decision stand.

Ross will then face charges before a jury of his Minnesota peers and will have an opportunity to present self-defense as an affirmative defense. He will have the burden of proving that defense and convincing a jury of his peers that his actions were proper.

Then he will either walk free or join Derek Chauvin.

The removal to federal court will stand as an available option indefinitely because the activity in question occurred when the actor was a federal officer engaged in federal law enforcement activity. Local authorities cannot obstruct or second guess such federal activity at the time or any time thereafter. It doesn't matter if a new federal administration eventually appears, or whether the officer eventually retires or changes jobs. What matters is what his status was at the time of the incident.

There’s an argument that shooting in that situation does not represent legitimate law enforcement activity, and that jumping out on a lady because she wasn’t parked the way they’d like also wasn’t legitimate law enforcement activity.

It was legitimate. They were on duty, moving as a convoy- many vehicles and personal. Not only was she clogging the road and obstructing traffic, her vehicle being perpendicular in the road (and taunting/harassing) presents a safety and security risk for their convoy to
pass. It was completely appropriate and legitimate for them to tell her to move and arrest her when she wouldn’t.

They were not on a mission....they were heading back to their HQ and had absolutely no reason to stop at all.

Are you dense? “On duty” doesn’t only imply at a mission in action. They are still on duty while enroute to missions and HQ. They absolutely had legitimate reason to remove her and her vehicle from the middle of the road before passing all their vehicles and agents through.

Lmao “a mission.”

To Burger King?

Why was the road being blocked to “Burger King” if they were on a break?

It was just a joke about them being worthless fatasses.