[chumster76]

Originally Posted by squeamishless ↗

I just noticed in the last video: the mouthy woman with the phone yelled at the woman to start moving ("Drive <name>, DRIVE, DRIVE!"), which of course spooked the agents. Idiots, all of them.

I wonder if she could be charged with anything.

[WonderMomma]

Originally Posted by WonderMomma ↗

Several major newsrooms and fact checking organizations have documented misinformation related to the case. These include AI altered images and miscaptioned videos that falsely claim to show the shooting or reactions to it. News outlets have issued corrections and clarifications to distinguish real footage from fabricated or misleading content.

I did additional research on this today for anyone interested.

As we have all seen, there is a growing pattern of misleading political framing from large, side-leaning media outlets such as CNN and Fox, along with outright fabricated content circulating mostly through social media. This pattern has been visible in multiple recent high-profile incidents, including mass shootings, the Charlie Kirk assassination, and is becoming more common with each new event.

Regarding this case specifically, there have been doctored videos, AI generated videos and images, misidentifications, incorrect captions, attempts to reconstruct the ICE agent’s face unmasked, false identifications of the agent, false associations of the victim, a miscaptioned SUV still implying intentional ramming, altered bystander footage, and even a miscaptioned Ron DeSantis clip from June 2025 presented as if it were direct commentary on this shooting.

No major side-leaning news organization (CNN, FOX, MSNBC, et al) has issued a formal retraction or correction about their own reporting, but politically charged framing across the media landscape is widespread. There are documented instances of commentary, character framing, and political context being layered onto factual reporting by both the outlets themselves and the politicians or commentators appearing on them. These are not fact corrections, but they significantly influence perception.

The left

Several mainstream reports highlighted Mayor Jacob Frey’s CNN interview, in which he forcefully rejected the federal characterization of the shooting, called the federal narrative inaccurate, and condemned the use of deadly force. His remarks were widely reported and framed the shooting as an example of government misconduct.

Syndicated television commentary from mainstream media personalities described the shooting as awful, tragic, and horrendous, and linked it to broader political implications. This reflects political framing rather than straight factual reporting.

Opinion commentary in left-leaning platforms characterized government statements as misleading or politically motivated and placed the shooting within broader systemic issues. These interpretations often ran alongside standard news coverage.

The right

Fox News host Jesse Watters described Renee Good in a dismissive manner shortly after the shooting, emphasizing her social media and pronouns instead of the factual details of the incident. Independent outlets noted this as a politicized framing choice. There was no correction or retraction because it was commentary, not news reporting.

A Fox News panel included contributor Jessica Tarlov questioning aspects of the Trump administration’s claims about the incident. Independent summaries described this as pushing back on the federal narrative that Good’s SUV struck ICE officers. Again, this was commentary, not a Fox correction.

Other conservative media personalities characterized Good as a self proclaimed poet with pronouns or repeated talking points that she violently ran over officers. Independent outlets criticized these framings as misleading, but they were not treated as factual errors requiring correction.

===

From my view, any major media outlet that broadcasts into American (or any other country) households for hours each day should be approached with a high level of skepticism. The problem is that many people accept what they hear from their preferred network as unquestionable truth, largely because it aligns with their existing biases. They do not realize, or do not care, that outlets which once provided relatively straightforward reporting have shifted into hybrid news and opinion platforms that function as influence machines. When facts are mixed with emotional reactions, selective framing, and personal opinion, the end product becomes a blend of half-truths and persuasion rather than objective information.

No credible news organization or information source should be operating this way, but here we are. The situation is further complicated by free speech and freedom of the press, which make it extremely difficult to regulate or reform any of this without creating even larger problems. For me it is a dire concern that feels insurmountable.

To put it plainly, unless someone was directly present, involved, or is personally investigating with full access and no restrictions, none of us should place blind trust in what is being broadcast. This is especially true on social media, which has become one of the most effective propaganda platforms in history.

When you compare it to historical propaganda efforts, Joseph Goebbels did not have anything close to the reach, speed, or psychological precision of modern digital ecosystems, and that should worry everyone.

Sources

Associated Press Fact Focus: https://apnews.com/article/1cd447e89...e9a24d660ed1d6

Star Tribune Misinformation Report: https://www.startribune.com/ai-misin...ting/601560361

AFP Fact Check: https://factcheck.afp.com/doc.afp.com.92829ZQ

Snopes Renee Good Tag Page: https://www.snopes.com/tag/renee_good/

Snopes Image Analysis: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/re...car-ice-image/

Snopes Misidentified Photo: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/ph...nneapolis-ice/

Snopes DeSantis Clip: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/re...esantis-video/

Snopes Unmasked ICE Agent Photo: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/ph...ood-ice-agent/

Snopes Steve Grove Name Rumor: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/re...ce-agent-name/

Reuters Fact Check: https://www.reuters.com/fact-check/o...ng-2026-01-09/

Lead Stories Fact Check: https://leadstories.com/hoax-alert/2...-from-ice.html

Cybernews Grok AI Report: https://cybernews.com/ai-news/grok-f...nt-renee-good/

NPR Expert Commentary (referenced in Cybernews): https://www.npr.org/2026/01/08/nx-s1...ee-nicole-good

People Magazine article on Fox commentary: https://people.com/jesse-watters-dis...nouns-11881513

The Express summary of Fox panel clip: https://www.the-express.com/entertai...A-Donald-Trump

CNN interview with Minneapolis Mayor Jacob: https://nypost.com/2026/01/07/us-new...-ice-shooting/

“The View” cohosts condemn the shooting and tie it to broader political commentary: https://ew.com/the-view-cohosts-cond...-good-11881487

Neutral reporting detailing broader protests, political reactions, and dispute over official narratives: https://www.reuters.com/world/us/fat...ts-2026-01-10/

[Kotax]

If any of you come across Ice be sure to expose them and everything they are gotta build up a database for em

[11B2P]

Originally Posted by Kotax ↗

If any of you come across Ice be sure to expose them and everything they are gotta build up a database for em

I thanked ICE for the raid they did on a local restaurant that hired illegals and found to be laundering money.

[Aurelius]

Originally Posted by Kotax ↗

removed ~wm

Are you inciting violence against federal law enforcement on this site?

[Gorelord]

lmao @ the keyboard warriors here ready to “expose” ICE or “line them up”

Same people who cry if you call them a guy just because they’re wearing a skirt…

In other words, y’all ain’t doing shit but whining on the internet.

[goghingwilde]

Originally Posted by Viking64 ↗

boot liquor

OH SHIT! that's what I get for using talk to text and not even remotely check it before posting. lol thank you for that!!!

[goghingwilde]

So by this logic, you must have a lot of issues with how MLK and Ghandi did protests, which by most historians are considered some of the most effective protests that achieved the most for society.

Originally Posted by DegoLocc ↗

The kinds of protests that "are allowed" in my opinion are the kind where the protesters are not psychically interfering with federal agents, but standing safely off to the side yelling and holding signs voicing their disdain. Anything more than that is an escalation that shouldn't be happening.

MLK and his protesters violated this by:

• Sit-ins at segregated lunch counters intentionally blocked business operations.
• Jail-ins deliberately overwhelmed police capacity.
• Freedom Riders physically occupied buses in defiance of state enforcement.
• Protesters refused to disperse when ordered, knowing arrests would follow.

Ghandi and his followers violated this in the following ways:

• Salt March (1930): Open defiance of British law by producing illegal salt.
  
• Protesters blocked railways, courts, and administrative offices.
  
• British officials were intentionally prevented from enforcing colonial law.

"Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community… is forced to confront the issue." -MLK JR

"Civil disobedience becomes a sacred duty when the State has become lawless or corrupt." -Ghandi

Also, ANY protest that is not on a sidewalk but instead on a street or other space with moving vehicles needs to have a permit from city officials to be there. That's the law.

Yeah... sometimes breaking laws is necessary in order to get change. Not all laws are good or right.

MLK protesters did the following that you would shake your little head at:

• Birmingham Campaign (1963): Marches conducted without permits because the city denied them.
• Selma to Montgomery marches: Blocked highways and a major bridge.
• March on Washington (1963): Required extraordinary federal accommodation because normal permitting frameworks could not handle it.

Gandhi encouraged mass lawbreaking- acts were illegal by design:

• Tax refusal
  
• Boycotts of government institutions
  
• Refusal to cooperate with police and courts

“One has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws.” -MLK Jr

“Non-cooperation with evil is as much a duty as cooperation with good.” -Ghandi

If you disagree, vote or litigate — don’t disrupt

Cowardly words. Safe words. Someone who will never question the status quo in a meaningful way when injustices run wild.

Please remember that sometimes, rule of law is not doing the right stuff and power dynamics keep voting/litigating from having the law be equal/equitable and safely enforced.

Examples from Ghandi:

• Indians had no meaningful electoral power under colonial rule.
• Courts were instruments of empire, not neutral arbiters.
• Disruption was the only lever available.

See anything in that list that feels familiar? Our supreme court is biased to such a degree it's laughable, ICE is given carte blanche to abuse people left and right, our federal govt is being actively purged of anyone who is not a Trump loving stooge and our government recently broke international law to invade venezuela, break the rights of people in our country, and is threatening to take over multiple countries.

NOW is the time for people to DISRUPT.

But I'm guessing nothing would ever make you take actionable steps.

You know how sometimes people ask the question, man, what would you do in Germany during wwii? I think your perspective would be 'shut up and let it happen.'

I don't want to live in a place where civilians can take it upon themselves to psychically obstruct government agents or law enforcement

You wouldn't live in the USA if civilians didn't do things like this. We wouldn't have the voting act and desegregations if civilians didn't do things like this. We wouldn't have a free India if civilians didn't do things like this.

Historically, the kind of protests you approve of have almost never produced major systemic change.

MLK warned of this specific mindset- “I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block… is the white moderate who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice.”

If protest never disrupts power, it doesn’t threaten injustice. History shows it doesn’t work.
Nut up, stop blanding your way into being a bootlicker.

[WonderMomma]

Originally Posted by Aurelius ↗

Are you inciting violence against federal law enforcement on this site?

He's banned from the thread but wanted to let you know I removed his quote from your post because his original post has been removed. Thanks.

[DegoLocc]

Originally Posted by goghingwilde ↗

If you disagree, vote or litigate — don’t disrupt

You're entitled to your own opinions. You're even entitled to compare Renee Good to MLK which I don't agree with.

But please don't disingenuously ascrib qoutes that I never said to me. You qouted a bunch of my words and then threw that in the middle of it all insinuating I said that. Which I didn't.