Category Archives: civil rights

Minneapolis, Minnesota

The reason investigations are conducted before making a judgment is because no one knows all the facts in the immediate aftermath of a tragedy.

That didn’t stop Department of Homeland Security Director Kirsti Noem from announcing within hours of the killing of a then unknown woman in Minneapolis that the woman was a domestic terrorist and that the agent of Immigration and Customs Enforcement had acted in self-defense after she ran him over with her car. The next day Vice President J.D. Vance displayed the fruits of his Yale law degree by proclaiming that the agent involved has “absolute immunity.” Vance also claimed, “She tried to stop him from doing his job. When he approached her car, she tried to hit him.”

Donald Trump quickly opened his big mouth as usual, claiming in a social media post that the woman, now identified as Renee Nicole Good, a 37-year-old mother of three, who had just dropped one of her children off at school, was, “very disorderly” and accused her of “obstructing and resisting” law enforcement. He also claimed Good “violently, willfully, and viciously ran over” the ICE officer and that the officer, “seems to have shot her in self-defense” and remarked, “it is hard to believe he is alive”.

None is this is true.

I have waited all this time to write about this tragedy because I will not rush to judgment. I still haven’t heard from official and trustworthy government sources. But I have now viewed several videos recorded by onlookers and one that appears to have been recorded by the shooter himself. I urge you to find them and view and come to your own conclusions. But be careful, there are also a large number of clearly doctored images floating around.

The videos tell me that in the moments before the shooting, Ms. Good tells the agent that she isn’t mad at him, and the agent, now identified as Jonathan Ross begins to circle her car. She reverses as he crosses in front of her S.U.V., then she starts to move, and turns to the right. Agent Ross is near her left headlight when he fires three times, killing her.

A Wall Street Journal investigation found that Ms. Good’s killing was one of 13 episodes in which federal immigration agents have used deadly force against civilians in vehicles since July.

A large number of reports from police officers and other experts repeatedly stress that Mr. Ross violated standard police procedures and specific Department of Homeland Security training and policy which boils down to, don’t put yourself in harm by moving in front of or behind a vehicle which is a potential threat.

What the Trump administration has done in Minnesota is flood the airwaves with unfounded charges and conclusions about the event to distract from any possible unbiased investigation. They unfortunately decided that the victim was a deranged leftist trying to run the officer over, and that the officer was defending himself. We now know the victim was a U.S. citizen, a mother of three, and had recently dropped her child off at school. Video footage also suggests at least the second and third shots fired by officer Ross occurred when the officer was to the side of the vehicle as the car was driving away.

Under the law each firing of the gun is analyzed separately. Witness testimony also suggests one of the ICE agents told the driver to MOVE, MOVE, MOVE. Good may have been trying to follow conflicting instructions from different agents. Slow motion video from various angles shows the vehicle appears to have been turning away when the officer fired the first shot, and certainly that was the case by the second and third shot when Good past Ross and clearly driving away. Most law enforcement agencies teach a common rule, do not shoot at a moving car unless your life is in danger. That didn’t happen here.

What’s even more shocking is what came next. No rendering aid. In fact, videos show the ICE agents restraining a man who identified himself as a doctor from going in to check the victim’s condition. There was no securing of the scene. The agents just drove off, leaving an American citizen for dead. That included the shooter, who jogged back to his car and hightailed it out of there, seemingly none for the wear and in no need of medical attention. This is spite of later government claims that he suffered from “internal bleeding.”

Instead of promising accountability, the Trump administration smeared a dead woman as a “domestic terrorist” before the facts were even known. They subsequently barred Minneapolis and Minnesota investigators from reviewing any of the evidence the federal forces gathered.

This is not law enforcement. This is a cover-up. It will not succeed. There is nothing Trump and his officers can do to prevent Minnesota from conducting its own investigation and convening a grand jury. There is nothing that stops the state from indicting and arresting Agent Ross.

The most the federal government can do is try to remove the case to the federal courts. That is likely to succeed. But the state prosecution will continue in the Federal District Court for the District of Minnesota. That court will follow Minnesota state law and rules. The prosecution will be led by Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty and Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison. Ross will face a jury of Minneapolis citizens.

As the protests continue, and Trump threatens to move regular United States Army soldiers into Minneapolis, I find this incident proof positive that Trump’s assault on American cities has nothing to do with immigrants. Renee Good was an American born citizen and mother.

Texas, according to Pew Research, has 2.1 million undocumented immigrants. Florida has 1.6 million. Minnesota around 130,000. The difference? Texas and Florida are “red states,” Trump supporters. Minnesota is a “blue state” which votes for Democrats.

This was never about immigration. It was always about terrorizing Trump’s political opposition. His so-called Department of Justice is now reportedly investigating the Governor of Minnesota Tim Walz and Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey. The terror continues.

#####

The Donnie-Mander

The Supreme Court, or rather the six Republican justices on the Supreme Court, have handed Donald Trump another victory. They issued a stay, blocking the order of a three-judge panel in Texas, which found the recent reapportionment of the state’s Congressional districts to be racially motivated and therefor illegal. The six, has been their pattern all year, issued their order in the dark of night on the “shadow” docket without an explanation or opinion. Greg Abbott, et al. v. League of United Latin American Citizens, et al.

The map the lower court panel blocked was seen as one of the most aggressive mid‑decade gerrymanders in recent history. The Supreme Court stay allows Texas to proceed with the new map, which analysts say could give Republicans five additional U.S. House seats in the 2026 midterms.

Gerrymandering 101

What, in a nutshell, is gerrymandering? The Encyclopedia Britannica has a wonderful explanation from which I have borrowed the graphic above. The American Constitution requires that every ten years we conduct a “census” to apportion representation in the House of Representatives. The Fourteenth Amendment, Section 2 begins, “Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed.”

Once the number of representatives is determined by the census, it is up to each state to draw the maps of legislative districts. Because the states have statewide elections for senators, governors, and to decide members of the Electoral College, there is data on how the state as a whole divides between the parties. Using the graphic above we find of a total population of fifty, thirty (60%) are orange voters while twenty (40%) are purple voters.

From that starting point, the state could draw “fair” maps which distributed the people in such a manner to generate three orange and two purple representatives, proportionate to the statewide electorate. But the state could also gerrymander, producing an outcome, using the example on the right above, of five orange and no purple representatives, or two orange and three purple representatives.

The term “gerrymander” was coined as a portmanteau of the name Elbridge Gerry and the word “salamander.” Gerry, who was the governor of Massachusetts, signed a redistricting law that redrew district lines in a way that favored his party. Critics said the new map created a weirdly shaped district which resembled a salamander. A satirical cartoon published in the Boston Gazette on March 26, 1812, popularized the word. The cartoon depicting the irregular shape helped turn a local political attack into a lasting political term.

The Donnie-Mander

The political parties have a long history of manipulating their maps to various degrees every ten years when the new census requires a reallocation of seats. But two things make this year’s manipulations unusual. First, this is a mid-census reapportionment. The last census was in 2020 with new maps taking effect in 2022 in most states. Second, this mid-census revision to the 2022 map came at the direct demand of Donald Trump. Texas’s Republican Governor Greg Abbott heeded Trump’s call and generated a new map that may add as many as five Republicans to the House in 2026. That is the map the Supreme Court now says can be put into place. With the Republican control in the House hanging on a tiny seven vote majority, Trump is clearly afraid the Democrats could gain control in the next election.

This Trump inspired Donnie-Mander, now sanctified by the Supreme Court, has set off an unprecedented arms race of mid-decade redistricting across the country. Missouri and North Carolina have passed their own Republican leaning maps. California voters approved a map designed to cancel out the Texas gains. Virginia and Maryland are working on new maps favoring Democrats. Illinois is considering one. Florida and Indiana are working on revisions on the Republican side.

National Public Radio has been keeping score on its web site. As of this writing they show a slight gain for Republicans on the basis of district voting patterns in next year’s election. Considering his atrocious polling numbers, Trump is going to need all the help he can get. The Center for Politics at the University of Virginia, one of my favorite pollsters, sees 2026 shaping up to be much too close to call.

Congress has over the years tried to set standards and take control of the redistricting process. It has never been able to pass a law to bring order out of the chaos.

The majority on the Supreme Court, by allowing these partisan mid-decade redistrictings, has created a free-for-all which is a lose-lose for the American people. But 2026 does promise to be a good show.

######

Trump’s Victory

Democrats thought they had a good issue. They’d pass still another continuing resolution to reopen the government in return for an agreement from Republicans to extend special subsidies for insurance policies bought through the Affordable Care Act. They misjudged the willingness of Donald Trump to continue his war on America by inflicting more pain on the American people. Cut food assistance for more than forty million Americans? Sure. Cripple the air traffic system by requiring controllers to work without pay? Of course. Furlough hundreds of thousands of federal workers and threaten to penalize them by not restoring their wages when they return to work. No problem.

Democrats underestimated Trump’s need to inflict pain. He loves it. He gets off on it. Nothing massages his massive ego more than enjoying a luxury party at his Florida home while people can’t buy food. If they can’t get groceries, let them eat cake. The ACA is also known as Obamacare. Trump hates Obamacare. A doubling or tripling of premium rates for Obamacare insurance policies just gives Trump more ammunition to attack the program. Trump has been trying to kill Obamacare for decades. He insists he will replace it with something better. He never produces a new plan. His supporters don’t seem to mind. So, Trump would not give in to the Democrats no matter what.

Read more

No Kings

Anywhere from five to eight million people turned out for the second “No Kings” protests across the nation. The rallies took place in over 2,600 locations across the United States.

I have first or secondhand knowledge of protests in New York, Washington D.C., Chicago, Portland, San Francisco, and Los Angeles. They were peaceful. Crowds were almost jubilant at having an opportunity to voice their opposition to the actions of the Trump administration. The only place I heard Trump supporters showed up to counter the protest was Palo Alto, California. No Kings protesters refused to engage with the Trumpies, who they feared were trying to provoke them.

Read more

It is a Nice Idea

Free speech is a pain in the rear. Always has been. Always will be.

It is a nice idea. If you have freedom of speech, you have the right to say whatever is on your mind without fear of repercussions. But there is a rub. It also means the guy standing next to you has freedom of speech. That means he can say whatever is on his mind, even if you find it to be abhorrent, disgusting, threatening and maybe even dangerous.

The men who designed our government met in secret and wrote a historic document detailing the structure of the national state and enumerating the powers and responsibilities of its parts. When the document was made public, the people were not pleased. They demanded a guarantee of their rights be written into the document.

Read more

Trump Invades D.C.

The tourist season in Washington, officially the “District of Columbia,” begins in April, about the time the cherry blossoms bloom. The nation’s capital is especially beautiful at that time. It is when school children from all over the nation arrive on a traditional trip to see the places they are familiar with from the news and to see the documents, faded though they may be, that were written to create the world’s first Constitutional democratic republic.

Read more

Hip hip for Harvard

Whether it was a high school football game on a Friday night or a college matchup you have probably all participated in a roaring cheer at one time or another. Anyone who has been following these posts for a while knows that I earned a bachelor’s degree from Princeton many years ago where I cheered on many a Princeton team. The college cheer was in fact heard for the first time at the famous first ever college football game between Princeton and Rutgers in 1869.

I write that preamble so that you get the significance of my rousing cheer for Harvard, Princeton’s rival among rivals in the league of elite universities. It is special when a Princeton tiger is moved to compliment people who wear crimson robes. Harvard does have a mascot I am told. But it appears to be an inanimate statue of the school’s founder, which must look strange along the sidelines. I digress.

Read more
« Older Entries