How uncomplicated is this unfortunate shooting in Minneapolis? This uncomplicated:
“Out of the car … Out of the car … Get out of the f-ing car!”
Mere steps from the victim’s vehicle, law enforcement gave this command three incredibly clear and audible times. In terms of responsibility and justification, this fact alone prompts the call: ballgame! Ignoring the order, the victim Renee Good is responsible for the circumstances. Attempting to flee the scene and running over a police officer, she justifies law enforcement’s response, too.
Ballgame.
When an officer of the law gives you a command, you follow it. That’s it. No matter the circumstances, it is exactly what I do. It is likely what the reader would do, too, and what we all would advise others to do. Because that is the lawful and subsequently required response. Wherever they are, wherever they show up, law enforcement is the authority on every scene. Otherwise, why have law enforcement? Of what use is it?
So, though it has been said a thousand times already, Good died because she didn’t follow authoritative commands. Then used her vehicle as a weapon to runover a law-enforcement officer, who, incidentally, ended up in the hospital—again!—with internal bleeding from the incident. As video of the altercation clearly demonstrates, we know Good and her wife both heard the officer’s commands, who was no less standing next to Good’s rolled down car window yelling exit-the-vehicle orders at her. On the other side of the car, we know Good’s wife heard the commands, too, urging Good to, “Drive, baby. Drive!” when she heard them. And drive Good did, directly at the assisting officer in front of her car, who was enforcing the lead officer’s exit commands and blocking Good’s escape.
That is the entirety of this case. All nonetheless captured on video and apodictic.
Well then, you ask, where is all this complexity and confusion coming from?
Well, from the people, liberals, who want to make the incident complex and confuse everything and everybody. Because, see, (a) this is what evil people do, and (b) the video-captured truth doesn’t help them, isn’t on their side. Clearly, the victim didn’t follow commands, one, and then targeted a cop with her car, two. Whether the targeting was intended or not is meaningless. Authority is to be obeyed; its commands followed. Thus, law enforcement is justified in the incident and liberals are screwed. Hence, there needs to be yelling, screaming, accusations, and confusing complexity added to this ordeal. There needs to be people banging drums, bellowing in bullhorns, and throwing outrage tantrums. And no fact is to be left to stand by this group, either:
The victim was in the middle of the road blocking traffic …
“She was turning around.”
She was blaring her car horn for 3 minutes and dancing to the sounds she was making …
“She was getting people out of her way.”
The cop told her to get out of the car three separate times …
“We don’t know what she heard.”
He was standing at her open car window, fer chrissake …
“So! The scene was chaotic.”
Well, her wife heard it on the other side of the car, and urged, “Drive, baby. Drive!” …
“We don’t know that, either!”
The victim targeted the officer standing directly in front of her car …
“We can’t know what’s in someone’s mind!”
Doesn’t the video evidence and internal bleeding speak directly to that …?
“Fascist!”
No fact left to stand, this is how a conversation goes with those determined to complexify and confuse the incident. The bottom line is it can’t be the victim’s fault, because liberals don’t want it to be her fault. This is doctrine and subsequent religion that these deniers want rejected. They want to blame law enforcement, ICE, and ultimately Trump, and by God that’s who is going to get the blame, whether that condemnation is accurate, true, and fair, or not, and no matter what any stupid video undeniably proves.
This isn’t lunacy, folks. This is religion. Liberals want to believe this version of events, and by God they are going to believe it, no matter what. And if you think this religious zealotry just applies to lowly, Minnesotan anti-ICE street warriors. Think again.
Geraldo Rivera is a smart guy—not very wise, but smart. He saw the video, too, and said Trump and ICE are lying about the shooting. “No one could’ve perceived [Good] to be violent. The government narrative,” he said, to mean: Trump’s narrative, “is bogus and belied by the video.”
The government’s story is contradicted by the video, Geraldo?
Good was three times given a command by law enforcement, clear as day. She refused it, then tried to flee the scene and ran over an assisting officer standing directly in front of her car. You say you watched the video, too. Who is the authority on the scene? What is the protocol for citizens in these situations, Geraldo?
Make no mistake, Geraldo knows who the authority is on the scene and the protocol for citizens, both. The flagrant video disobedience and victim recklessness are impossible to miss, too, but not impossible to misinterpret, obviously. Because that is precisely what Geraldo did: interpreted what actually happened into something more ideologically palatable and profitable, into doctrine and a belief and a subsequent religion that supports what he, as a matter of zealous religious faith, wants to believe. Why the clearly intentional misinterpretation? Or rather, the lie?
Because Geraldo is a liberal who doesn’t like Trump, and who wants ICE to get the blame for this incident, instead, so that Trump and MAGA voters ultimately get the blame. It means Geraldo thinks it is okay to sacrifice law enforcement officers in his psychotic and unhinged get-Trump and dismantle-MAGA religious pursuits. He doesn’t care if he smears and condemns the officers, or if they are injured or killed as a result. It doesn’t matter to him that they are merely following the commands of their elected superiors and performing their assigned task, duties, and function. Sticking it to Trump and MAGA is all that matters, and sacrificing law enforcement is the way to do it—for shooting an innocent, non-violent woman who was merely lost after dropping off her kids at school and trying to comply, of course.
But, that’s not at all what happened, you say.
No. It isn’t.
So then, Geraldo is lying, you say.
Well, isn’t he? You saw the video, too.
Actually, Geraldo isn’t lying. No, it isn’t true that officers shot an innocent, non-violent woman who was trying to comply. But this is what Geraldo wants to believe, is the much desired and necessary religious doctrine to which he wants to subscribe. To hell with the truth, the law, justice, and morality.
Gee, is this a religion for good or evil. I can’t tell.
Fox News’ former lead man, Brit Hume, was asked about the incident, too. He said he had watched all the videos repeatedly, but, “I gotta say, I am really struck by the certainty with which people on both sides of this issue state their diametrically opposed views of what the videos say.”
“Struck” by the certainty and confidence, Brit? When law enforcement instructs someone to get out of the car, is law enforcement not the authority on the scene, and aren’t people supposed to immediately obey their commands, Brit? When an assisting officer stands in front of someone’s car enforcing the lead officer’s commands, are citizens to comply? Or to try and flee and run the officer over?
Isn’t it all just this simple, Brit? Are you not “struck” by the simplicity?
And does the simplicity not “belie” your conclusion, Geraldo?
The rest of us must obediently and dutifully comply with authoritative commands from law enforcement. Because, well, that is the lawful and subsequently required response. Hume and Geraldo would assuredly obey and comply, too. So what makes Renee Good any different, Brit? These are the rules for every single person in America, is the “rule of law,” in fact. And everyone is subject to the rules except … Renee Good? You are surprised at how “certain” and confident people can be after simply applying these rules to an incident in Minnesota?
Gee, could you not apply them, too, Brit? Geraldo?
The fact is this incident isn’t confounding to Hume or Rivera, either one, or to any other liberal for that matter. They all know the protocol and, like the rest of us, can all see what happened. And if this had happened to a MAGA affiliated person, I don’t know, say like, two MAGA-hat wearing, bleach-wielding Nigerians in Chicago, liberals all would be screeching about the authoritative sanctity of law enforcement and laying out the protocols for dutiful citizenry compliance with lawful authority. So why can’t liberals do that with this incident?
Well, I could say liberals know the truth of this incident, but simply refuse it, because they hate Trump. That part is true; they loathe Trump. But as for the truth of the incident, liberals actually can’t see it. I used to think they could see the truth and just didn’t want to acknowledge or admit it. But I don’t believe that anymore. Because I think their hate and subsequent desire for another outcome, for doctrinal beliefs and consequent religion that support that outcome, blinds them to it. Not blindness in a way that they can’t visually see the evidence and truth with their eyes and register it in mind, but more that they deny and reject it emotionally and spiritually. Or rather, in their hearts, which are petrified toward anything they religiously despise and oppose, like Trump success, and like MAGA validation and ideological supremacy, for examples.
Simply put, liberals don’t allow themselves to see anything, to acknowledge any evidence, that indicts or condemns their hate or that challenges the held religious beliefs that maintain it. Their eyes see the evidence, but their hearts, like hardened titanium, deny and reject it. Anytime the truth contradicts what they want to believe, or contravenes the hate they want to continue, and especially when it condemns their own beliefs and religion and, worse, justifies and empowers their ideological enemies—the truth is literally reviled by liberals, is vehemently despised and abhorred.
So much so that it doesn’t matter if what their eyes are seeing is true; they reject it, won’t see it, can’t see it. An opposing, condemning truth cannot exist because their own doctrine and hate must prevail and endure. Their manufactured version of events is all they can see, is all they will see, and nothing else. No matter how obvious the truth, liberals are blinded to it, to reality. The religious zealots they are, they then convince themselves that their perspective and opinion are justified and moral, too. Because the perspective and opinion must be justified and moral, else their desired beliefs are contradicted; else their hate is contravened; else their religion is condemned, and Trump and MAGA are righteous, exalted, supreme, and empowered.
And this is important: it is the same religious zealotry for famous, big time media personalities as it is lowly, Minnesotan anti-ICE warriors.
It is all to say liberals convince themselves of the lie they want to live, and of their righteousness. As far as they are concerned, the lie is the truth, is their doctrine and religion. And they cannot and will not be talked out of their religion, either. They are willfully blind to anything contrary and contravening.
In their relaxed, I’m-more-accomplished-than-you tone, Hume and Rivera, and liberals all, would no doubt say they are simply being objective in their analysis, and that MAGA people just don’t like what they are saying because MAGA people are Trump doormats, er, loyalists.
Well, is law enforcement the legal authority on every scene or not? When they give a command, is everyone obliged to follow it or face the myriad consequences?
Ballgame, folks. Accomplishments and religion notwithstanding.
©JMW 1/2026
All Rights Reserved
John Mark Warren 