Human Events Daily - Jack Posobiec - ICE Officer Suffered Internal Bleeding When The Car Hit, Partner Now Under DOJ Investigation

Jan. 14, 2026 - Human Events Daily - Jack Posobiec

47:45

ICE Officer Suffered Internal Bleeding When The Car Hit, Partner Now Under DOJ Investigation

Here’s your Daily dose of Human Events with @JackPosobiec Start 2026 with less exposure and more control with Patriot Protect at https://www.PATRIOT-PROTECT.COM/POSO. Use promocode POSO for 15% off your yearly subscription. You never agreed to share this information. Now you can take it back. Support the show
[Read More]

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	I want to take a second to remind you to sign up for the Pozo Daily Brief.
	It is completely free.
	It'll be one email that's sent to you every day.
	You can stop the endless scrolling trying to find out what's going on in your world.
	We will have this delivered directly to you totally for free.
	Go to humanevents.com slash pozo.
	Sign up today.
	It's called the Pozo Daily Brief.
	Read what I read for show prep.
	You will not regret it.
	Humanevents.com slash pozo.
	Totally free.
	The posto daily brief.
	This is what happens when the fourth turning meets fifth generation warfare.
	A commentator, international social media sensation, and former Navy intelligence veteran.
	This is Human Events with your host, Jack Posovic.
	Christ is king.
	President Trump says he's canceling all meetings with Iranian officials until the killing of protesters stops.
	Human rights activists say the Iranian regime has now killed more than 2,000 protesters and arrested more than 16,000.
	Meanwhile, President Trump's national security team will meet today to discuss Iran intervention options.
	President Trump, following up on a promise that he made back in November, the administration has now ended temporary protected status for Somalia.
	Temporary means temporary.
	Somali nationals with TPS are now required to leave the United States by March 17th, 2026.
	This is, in essence, a federal invasion of the Twin Cities and Minnesota, and it must stop.
	Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison sued the Trump administration, claiming that its deployment of federal agents and officers illegally oversteps the state's law enforcement authority, quote, endangering the public safety, health, and welfare of all Minnesotans and provoking protest in the process.
	What was Governor Tim Walsh doing to keep these officers safe and to bring order to the city of Minneapolis?
	The answer was absolutely nothing.
	They describe being left for dead by the person who wants to be the vice president of the United States.
	You can use the term insurgency.
	You can use the term insurrection.
	You can use the term domestic terrorism.
	Mayor Jacob Fry, Governor Tim Walz, Attorney General Keith Ellison have deliberately, willfully, and purposefully incited this violent insurrection, this violent insurgency against immigration and customs enforcement, against Border Patrol.
	When are these people from countries all over the world, not just South America?
	They're coming in from all over the world, David, all over the world.
	And crime rates are down all over the world because of it.
	But let me tell you.
	David, when are those people going to be prosecuted?
	When are the people that burned down Minneapolis going to be prosecuted?
	Well, ladies and gentlemen, welcome on board today's edition of Human Events Daily.
	We're here live on Real America's Voice.
	Folks, the breaking news out of Minneapolis is tremendous.
	Today is January 14th, 2026.
	Anno Domini.
	What do we have?
	It's very clear.
	The ICE officer suffered internal bleeding, internal injuries when he was sideswiped by the car driven by a deranged anti-ICE agitator up there in Minneapolis just a week ago.
	This is why so many times when we see these things, we say, wait to get all of the information.
	Jonathan Ross is his name.
	The ICE officer, Iraq war veteran, combat veteran, someone who joined up, deployed through the National Guard, came back, joined Border Patrol, then later joined ICE, who's been working for DHS for 19 years.
	And that is why when you look at his GoFundMe and his GiveZENGO, he's raised, I believe it's, I checked it last night, it was just under $900,000.
	He's on his way, well on his way now, to breaking $1 million.
	And he's going to have real medical bills on top of it now.
	Internal bleeding.
	And the question is, of course, if he's able to recover from these injuries, the second time he's been injured on the job due to a car ramming attack.
	And we had the ICE director on here yesterday telling us that the car rammings have been up a thousand fold since this took place, since all this took place.
	It's very simple.
	We are winning.
	They are losing.
	They're losing the narrative.
	They're losing the narrative left and right because America knows if, and the left knows this, look, the left knows this.
	This is what's going on right now.
	The left is throwing everything they can at these situations because we've swung the narrative all the way back now.
	We pivoted the narrative all the way back from ICE agent murders protester to anti-ICE agitator attempted to kill an ICE officer because that's what she did.
	And what did I tell you last week?
	I said, stop using the left's frame on this.
	Stop.
	You must state the truth when you speak.
	Don't enter their frame ever.
	Don't ever give up the fact of what happened that predicated all of these issues, every single one of them that took place.
	No.
	The officer was out there conducting operations, detention operations, interdiction operations.
	He's out there doing his job.
	He's doing his job.
	And these agitators came up and they interfered with those operations.
	And then they crossed the line, drive baby drive, remember?
	And that got to the point where, unfortunately, this driver attempted to ram the individual with her vehicle, did ram him, by the way, not just attempted, did ram him.
	And he suffered internal bleeding.
	This isn't a game.
	It's not a LARP.
	It's not an augmented reality game and ARG or any of that stuff.
	No, it's not any of that.
	And so what have we learned?
	What we've learned now is that the left realizes that if we can go through this crucible, if we can go through this fight right now of getting the worst out, they're going to throw everything they can.
	All the TikTok pages are running, oh, what about this?
	And oh, what about this?
	And oh, what about this?
	And Joe Rogan's up there crying.
	Oh, I can't believe they had to use an officer to arrest somebody.
	I don't know why they're doing it.
	Joe Rogan's crying, crying, crying all over Spotify.
	If we do this once, we'll never have to do it again.
	If we do a thorough job, if we do a serious job, but only if we see the job through to the end.
	And the left realizes this.
	This is the end of the line for the leftist experiment at mass migration and illegal immigration into our country to change our demographics, to change our voting, to change our economics.
	We're done with it.
	We're going to have a home again, boys.
	We're going to have a home again.
	Right back, Jack Posobiec, Human Events Daily.
	End in our wave, and our golden age has just begun.
	This is Human Events with Jack Posobiec.
	Now it's time for everyone to understand what America First truly means.
	Welcome to the second American Revolution.
	All right, Jack Posobiec, we are back.
	Human events daily, Real America's voice.
	Ladies and gentlemen, scammers and criminals, you know, they've raised the states last year and they're only getting worse.
	Scams are more complicated and harder than ever to catch.
	Believe me, we're talking about Minnesota right now.
	We know the AI clones, the texts that sound like your family and friends, the emails that are getting better at impersonating your banks.
	And how do they do it?
	Because they have your information.
	Your information that's out there, your name, address, phone number, even some of your online activities are publicly available, like what sites you subscribe to right now.
	It's not hard to find.
	And what's crazier is that there's hundreds of data brokers openly listing all of this information on you.
	It's how often the scammers decide who to target and often house identity fraud starts.
	But this year, the choice is yours.
	Stay vulnerable or take action with Patriot Protect.
	Patriot Protect removes your personal data from the internet, wiping it from Google and every major website where scammers, cyber criminals, and stalkers search for targets.
	Patriot Protect also deletes your personal information from over 240 people search engines and data brokers, the exact sites that criminals use to case people before they strike.
	It's the peace of mind of having your own security team all for about the cost of keeping your porch lights on.
	Start 2026 with less exposure and more control with Patriot Protect at patriot-protect.com slash pozo.
	Again, that's patriot-protect.com slash posto and use promo code pozo for 15% off your yearly subscription.
	You never agreed to share this information.
	Now you can take it back.
	Patriot-protect.com slash posto.
	And again, promo code pozo for 15% off your yearly subscription.
	So huge news that broke just yesterday as we were finishing the show.
	I think it started kind of bubbling up as the show was on.
	I didn't realize it.
	Finished the show here.
	And all of a sudden, I go to my phone and I'm getting blown up by journalists, by reporters, the whole mainstream media.
	They're like, Pesobic, what did you do?
	Pesobic, who were you talking to?
	So what is all this?
	Like, what did I do this time?
	You know, we're obviously dealing with everything with Scott Adams yesterday.
	And they were all asking me, did I talk to someone in the Department of Justice about the wife, we should say partner of the anti-ICE agitator in Minneapolis?
	Like, no, I didn't talk to her about this at all.
	What are you talking about?
	I said, I went on air and talked about it.
	I went on War Room and talked about it.
	I didn't, you know, I didn't talk to anyone in the DOJ about that.
	That's like just silly.
	Why would you say I did that?
	And then, and then they said, well, did you talk to any lawyers about it?
	I said, like, yeah, like some lawyers I know.
	And I was like, why are you asking me this?
	Can you please explain why you're asking me this?
	And they say, well, because apparently, and this is the breaking news, there's now a criminal investigation into Becca Goode, who, by the way, is the false wife of Renee Goode, because Julie Kelly has been out there scrubbing all of the records.
	They never got legally married, at least in any of the states that she's checked, and she's checked them all.
	What they had was a name change so their names would, their last names would be the same, but not an actual marriage.
	She is now under criminal investigation for her actions that day, as well as her ties to these anti-ICE groups, these Antifa groups that she's been working with.
	Well, one of the lawyers that I discussed all of this with is Will Chamberlain of the Article 3 Project, and he joins us now.
	Will, how's it going?
	Always good to be with you, Jack.
	So, yeah, I remember, you know, looking at all of this the other day, and I just called you when I was actually in Minneapolis still, and I said, my gosh, you know, everyone's talking about all this thing, but these are crimes.
	They're committing crimes online.
	It doesn't matter, quote unquote, what side you're on.
	It matters what the law is.
	So, Will, does it surprise you that she potentially or apparently is facing legal liability here?
	No, not at all.
	I mean, the really interesting thing is that, you know, from the get-go, we knew that this was a good shoot.
	All you needed for that was the very first videos that came out that showed that Renee Goode's car was pointed directly at the ICE officer when she hit the accelerator.
	That's all you needed.
	And you didn't really need anything.
	And Will, you were not to, you're not going to say it, so I will.
	You defended that legal analysis quite handily on Piers Morgan yesterday.
	Yes.
	Yeah.
	I thought I did reasonably well in the face of some very bizarre arguments from people like Jerry Durban.
	No, and you didn't even have the information that came out today that in fact the officer suffered internal bleeding when the car hit him.
	Yeah, it's weird how getting hit by a car might really hurt.
	You know, it's only like two tons of metal or something.
	These people are, I remember listening to Tim Miller in this, you know, like pretending like, oh, he was never in danger.
	What's the big deal?
	He could have just gotten out of the way like a complete idiot.
	They barely touched him.
	Like he's just got a Spider-Man himself.
	Like being run over by a car.
	You're weak.
	Yeah, maybe because he got hit by a car six months ago and sustained serious injuries to both of his arms where, I mean, you've got very serious arteries and veins there where he needed a lot of hospital, hospitalization for it.
	And so, yes, obviously he doesn't want to be hit by a car because it's 4,000 pounds of metal with a combustion engine.
	I believe that, yeah, Honda Pilot.
	Ooh, not very green combustion engine there, by the way.
	Yeah.
	Well, you know, I don't begrudge, you know, people for having Honda pilots.
	I begrudge them driving it.
	ICE officers.
	Yeah.
	So this is, I mean, it's not actually that surprising.
	I mean, once you saw the video that the ICE officer took with his cell phone, you saw that clearly the partner of the driver, this woman, Becca Goode, committed a number of crimes just on tape.
	She revealed the existence of a conspiracy to obstruct law enforcement in that video when she talked about how she was going to be there all day.
	And then she obstructed federal law enforcement in that because she intimidated through force or the threat of force, the officer.
	That's also a federal felony.
	Then she urged her partner to flee arrest another felony and then also urged her partner to flee by driving, which is urging her partner to commit an aggravated assault with a deadly weapon against a law enforcement officer, the most serious felony of the bunch.
	So, you know, in one video with a minute, you've got, you know, evidence for four distinct federal crimes.
	And it was sort of obvious that this woman should be charged, that she is one of the primary reasons that this entire thing happened and that Renee Goode took this foolish course of action, threatened the life of an ICE officer and passed away.
	So she needs to be held accountable for her crimes.
	That was obvious back then.
	Back on, you know, five days ago, I tweeted, quote, it is extremely important that DOJ prosecute all of Renee Goode's co-conspirators.
	Everyone needs to understand that the only crimes committed were those by Goode, her wife.
	At the time, I thought it was her wife, her partner, and all those who aided and abetted their obstruction of law enforcement, because that's the real story here.
	I mean, I think that, you know, law can serve a teaching function as well.
	There's a teaching function that needs to happen here, whereby we and the Trump administration teaches the general public and the left that if you drive at law enforcement and you urge others to drive at law enforcement and they shoot you, law enforcement's not going to get prosecuted, but you might.
	And what's crazy about all of this is that you get, and we'll have Libby Evans on here in a second, is there's that video now as well of Becca Goode, the partner, popping up.
	And, you know, this is like some weird, it's basically the, it's basically the 2026, or I should say the Netflix version of Thelma and Louise, because it's like a couple of lesbians who decide to wage war on ICE officers.
	And she's sitting there going, why did you have to have real bullets?
	Because he's a real ICE officer, because there's real jeopardy that he's in when he's on these situations, and because of people like you who keep ramming them with cars.
	That's why.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	What did you think would happen?
	What did you think would happen?
	I mean, these people are in la la land.
	And also, I mean, I'm willing to give this woman a plea deal if she reveals the extent to which people taught her to do these things, right?
	Like she was part of this Ice Watch organization.
	And I saw some of the documentation coming out of that organization suggesting that, you know, there's some moderate amount of risk or low risk from trying to obstruct ICE officials.
	What are these people doing?
	I mean, this is all, these people should probably be brought up on racketeering charges because what they're trying to do is they're they're lying to people in order to get them to violate federal law.
	And that's, that seems criminal too.
	It certainly does seem criminal.
	And these, the, and, and that's why, by the way, the DOJ is rightly opened up these criminal investigations.
	And look, you know, the D and people, and I see people saying, well, what about the optics, Jack?
	What about the optics?
	No, no, no, no.
	This isn't about optics.
	There's no optics.
	The DOJ didn't choose to commit these actions.
	They chose to commit these actions.
	These organizations chose to commit these actions.
	Renee Goode and Rebecca Good chose to commit these actions.
	They are the ones who broke the law and committed these actions in Minneapolis and did so on video.
	It wasn't the DOJ, wasn't Pam Bondi, wasn't the U.S. Attorney's Office of Minneapolis, wasn't any of these places that decided to commit these actions?
	No, you are the ones who are responsible for your behavior.
	And it's ridiculous.
	Well, because there's so many people saying, oh, they're playing this weird like meta-reality game of, you know, we need to be careful about the optics here.
	No, no, no, no.
	We need to apply the law equally.
	How did we get so far away from this?
	Correct.
	I mean, optics aside, obviously, you need to prosecute the actual violations of law that occurred.
	You know, I've seen some people like, why isn't there an investigation of the officer?
	Well, because there is no evidence that the officer committed a crime and the evidence we do have exonerates him.
	So we don't need to do anything further.
	However, there is actually clear evidence of serious criminal activity for Becca Good, so it should be investigated.
	And moreover, I think these people who are worried about optics are thinking about this entirely wrong, even from the perspective of optics.
	The way you ensure that the optics are good is by making clear where the government stance is and making, and again, this teaching function that prosecution can serve.
	You know, people like Joe Rogan may look at that and think that the potential liability or Piers Morgan might look at that and think the potential criminal liability lies with the officer.
	They must be instructed.
	They must be taught that in fact the officer did nothing wrong and the liability.
	Sorry, God, the liability lies with the Ms. Good.
	The reason you have laws is to set those boundaries in society.
	Right back, Jack Posobiec, Will Chamberlain, Human Events.
	These are influencers.
	And they're friends of mine.
	Jack Pisovic.
	Where's Jack?
	Jack?
	He's got a great job.
	All right, folks, Jack Posobiec.
	We're back live here, Human Events Daily.
	We're talking.
	talking about all of this stuff going on in Minneapolis, the criminal investigation now into the partner of the agitator who rammed her car at a police officer, excuse me, an ICE officer there in Minneapolis.
	Will also, one of the things that I asked about with Andrew Branca, talked with you about off air, is this question of the felony murder rule.
	And, you know, the basic concept of the felony murder rule is that if I have this correctly, you know, now I'll try to, you know, explain in English for the folks listening, is that when you are committing a crime, if, and you are engaged in partners with a crime, that if a death occurs in the commission of that crime during the commission of that crime, that you are liable for that death, even if you didn't directly cause that death.
	So, for example, if your partner is shot and killed by police, you can be held liable under the felony murder rule.
	That's sort of the general idea of it.
	Now, when we dug into Minneapolis and the state of Minnesota, we found that Tim Walz actually defanged the state felony murder rule a couple of years ago in 2023, because most states have this.
	This is a traditional law.
	However, because this was a federal officer, that means that the federal felony murder rule would apply.
	And when you go to the federal statute, it actually says that murder is the unlawful killing of a human being with malice aforethought, every murder perpetuated by a person lying in wait, da-da-da-da, or listen to this, committed in the perpetration of or attempt to perpetrate any arson, escape, murder, kidnapping, treason, espionage, sabotage, aggravated sexual abuse, or sexual abuse, child abuse, burglary, robbery, et cetera, perpetuated as part of a pattern,
	a lot about children all the way, where the effect of the death of any human being other than him who was killed is murder in the first degree.
	So escape is actually mentioned as one of the crimes that can trigger felony murder under the federal statute.
	Now, Will, when she says drive, baby, drive, is that not exactly what she is, she is doing?
	I think, yeah, she's definitely fleeing a lawful arrest.
	And I'm literally sitting here thinking to myself, okay, does the federal escape statute apply to merely fleeing a lawful arrest?
	Because it obviously applies to people who are like convicted criminals escaping from prison or convicted criminals escaping the custody of a prison warden during a transfer or something.
	But there's an interesting question that I'm trying to figure out the answer to, and maybe I'll have it by the end of the segment of whether or not escape under the federal, you know, the federal escape statute includes fleeing from an arrest or if that's just if that's just a different distinct crime, which is just resisting arrest or fleeing arrest.
	Yeah, and you're right.
	I'm sure they have separations there.
	But I mean, point being though, is we're pretty close.
	We're very close to triggering this, isn't she?
	She's right up on the line of it.
	Yeah, we're not, we're definitely looking at that.
	Now, now I just asked Grock this question.
	I mean, Grock is not flawless on this, but Grock doesn't think so.
	Grock thinks that custody under the escape statute requires you to already be in confinement.
	So, you know, that probably means that pre-arrest, you're not in custody.
	And so it's a distinct crime and probably not, therefore, triggering the felony murder statute.
	But I might be wrong, right?
	Like this is, that's just, that's just AI coming at you on a specific question.
	I don't know.
	I think regarding, you know, the funny thing is the felony murder thing matters, but one of the things that's, that's totally missing in this discussion, it was totally missing on peers yesterday too, when I did it too, is there, there's this bizarre attempt to create an equivalence between the potential policy mistakes that the officer made, which I don't even think he did, but just even assuming for the sake of discussion, it was a mistake for him to be in front of the car that police policy says he shouldn't.
	And they're saying, well, well, he made mistakes and so did, so did she.
	It's like, no, one of whom might have not adhered to a best policing practice and the other one committed multiple federal felonies.
	There's a difference that really is actually essential here.
	You know, if you're blaming the police officer, you're blaming him for not being in the best possible position that he could be.
	And honestly, it's kind of a hard thing to blame him for because it's a bizarre situation.
	Normally, when you pull people over, they aren't parked across the middle of the road and they aren't obstructing a law enforcement investigation going on a few few houses down.
	And what happened here?
	You had an aggravated assault with a deadly weapon by this woman.
	Oh, it's a mistake.
	A small act of defiance, as Jon Stewart would put it.
	No, no, it's a serious felony.
	Aggravated assault on a law enforcement officer can land you 20 years in prison.
	That's no joke.
	That's not a small act of defiance.
	And, you know, I think, I mean, obviously it's a tragedy that this woman died, just like it's a tragedy that any woman dies.
	That's what John Stewart said.
	Yeah, John Stewart.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	The small act of defiance.
	Right.
	But I think it would have been another reason it would have been good for this woman to survive is so that she could have been put on trial for the serious crime she committed and put in jail.
	And Will, let me ask you about that because the point of a trial here as well, and to be fair, look, in that area, I think there's a real question of whether or not you could get a jury that does not commit jury nullification, like we've seen in Washington, D.C.
	This is the same area, of course, where Derek Chauvin was charged and that jury process was a complete joke, as we've talked about for years.
	And that being said, though, that being said, the fact that there should be a trial, the fact that she should be put on trial, what does what message?
	You said that prosecution sends a message to society and is a teaching moment.
	To me, I say to the Trump administration, to everyone else out there, this is the moment you do, perhaps pun intended, you do floor the gas in a legal sense, right?
	You say, we are going to go and actually enforce all of these laws.
	And you certainly see Stephen Miller saying that to all federal law enforcement, remember, you have federal immunity while in the conduct of your duties.
	It is really simple.
	The administration is backing them fully.
	And I believe they should prosecute every single person.
	What is it?
	18 USC 111, where they're just, they're in obstruction of justice.
	It's constant obstruction of justice everywhere.
	Arrest them all.
	Yeah, I think it's a very, very important teaching function for two respects.
	It teaches ICE officers that the administration has their back, that they don't have to be afraid of enforcing federal law as long as their conduct is lawful.
	And then the second thing is it teaches the general public and it teaches would-be obstructors of justice.
	Like, you know, the idea here being you act like this and you get yourself killed by failing to, you know, comply with police orders.
	We're literally, we're not going to prosecute the ICE officer who killed him.
	Even going to investigate him because he didn't do anything wrong.
	But we will prosecute your co-conspirators, even if it's your romantic partner.
	Who's more?
	Not only does your romantic, will your romantic partner have to mourn your death if you pull a stunt like this.
	She'll also have to fend off a federal criminal prosecution and probably go to jail for it, and I think that's a really good lesson for everybody to learn.
	Will Chamberlain, where can people get your coordinates at?
	Will Chamberlain on x and follow the article three project, H3paction.com?
	All right, check them out folks.
	Right back Libby Emmons with a hot new op-ed about all of this.
	human events daily jack where's jack where is he jack i want to see you Great job, Jack.
	Thank you, what a job you do.
	You know we have an incredible thing.
	We're always talking about the fake news and the bad, but we have guys and these are the guys should be getting policy.
	All right, Jack Sobic, back LIVE, REAL America's Voice.
	Human Events Daily, and i'm just gonna say it.
	I'm gonna say it again, you people need to stop crying about the government enforcing the laws of the United States Of America.
	We had a giant election about this, 2024, the popular vote.
	What signs are we holding up?
	Mass deportations now?
	What did you think mass deportations meant vibes, essays?
	No no, it meant mass deportations.
	The American people voted for this.
	And Donald Trump, when he was on that campaign trail, he talked about mass deportations every single possible chance he was given any interview, any stop, even when he was sitting at Waffle House or the Mcdonald's.
	We're gonna have mass deportations, we're gonna have mass deportations.
	He would say it over and over and over.
	We need to do it, we need to do it.
	And they asked him.
	Remember, when they asked him what the cost was, they said, what's the cost, mr president?
	What's the cost, he said?
	He said there's no cost that's too high.
	There's no cost that's too high because it's about keeping our country.
	That's why, on this issue, above all other issues, we're not pumping the brakes, we're not pausing, we're not going to back down because some podcaster on Spotify is all crying about it up there.
	No, the only way out is through.
	We have the initiative.
	We are going to press the initiative.
	We are going to continue.
	The American people want this and the laws on the books of the United States Of America are wanted.
	And, by the way, by the way, if the left wants to go and abolish ice, then by all means, by all means, introduce the legislation.
	Go to every single state, go to every single state legislature, every single state capital.
	Go to the federal government, introduce your abolish ice legislation.
	I dare you, I dare you right now.
	Introduce the legislation and let's see how it goes.
	Let's play the game you want to play, let's play.
	I'm willing to roll the dice, are you?
	Libby Emmons joins us now.
	Libby, you've got a great op-ed up at Humanevents.com, all about larping and the, the goods who, by the way, Julie Kelly tells us are not legally married in in any true sense.
	There was actually a name change certificate, but not a marriage certificate that they've been able to find in any of these states.
	What is LARPing and why did LARPing go wrong so badly wrong in this case?
	Yeah, so for all the gamers out there, they know what LARPing means.
	It's live action role-playing.
	It's a word I learned from my son, who is, you know, 15.
	But basically, my supposition here is that these two women, along with many other activists, were out there playing at activism.
	You have Becca Goode, the partner of Renee Good, after the shots were fired, saying to ICE agents, why did you have real bullets?
	They didn't think that the law enforcement was actually out there being law enforcement.
	They thought law enforcement was out there to, you know, LARP around with these activists.
	And it doesn't make any sense that this is what they should be doing, but they're encouraged to do this by Democrat politicians, by celebrities who go out there wearing their pins and buttons and donate to the ACLU and then pretend that that makes them good people.
	And there's no reason for Americans to go out into the streets and protest law enforcement that's out there doing their jobs.
	And furthermore, I think it's really important to note that ICE wouldn't have to be out in the communities going door to door looking for people if the state of Minnesota wasn't LARPing as well, believing that they are not accountable to federal law.
	The state of Minnesota says that local law enforcement officers cannot comply with federal law enforcement actions.
	And that's absolutely crazy.
	If local cops were turning over illegal alien criminals to ICE, then ICE wouldn't be out there in the first place doing this kind of stuff.
	So Libby, when we talk about LARPing, the scene, I guess, or the video that's come out of this that really strikes to me on this is when Becca Goode, the partner of Renee Good, is there on the street.
	And this has gone viral.
	It was something that came out during the wake of this, but people were so focused on the car ramming that they kind of missed this.
	She says, she said, it was my fault.
	I told her to be here.
	But then she also added, why did it have to be real bullets?
	Why did it have to be real bullets?
	Libby, did they not ever stop to think about the consequences of their actions?
	Or are they just so wrapped up in the idea that they're fighting this quote unquote revolutionary charge and filming content for their TikToks that they never actually stop to think about what could happen to them because they're breaking laws and in this case, committing violence?
	Yeah, I don't think they did think about the consequences.
	And I certainly know when my son was a newborn and there were protests and I was interested in going check it out in New York City.
	It was when it was Occupy Wall Street was happening.
	I did not go and I did not go because I had much greater responsibilities than going to see what the idiots were doing downtown taking over Zuccotti Park.
	So I don't think they were thinking about the consequences of their actions.
	I don't think they thought there were consequences to their actions.
	I think they thought, as you said, that they could go out there, shoot some TikToks, you know, get that all set up and still get home in time for the school bus to drop the little boy off who now, of course, is an orphan, which is terrible.
	And you have to think about the consequences of these things.
	They didn't realize, perhaps, that ICE is actually a law enforcement organization that is going out there doing a job, doing the job that they are mandated and required to do.
	They thought it was just, you know, some kind of joke.
	And what's interesting, too, is I was checking out what Joy Reed had to say about it because I always find her perspective pretty interesting.
	And what she said is that the activists believed that these white women would be protected by their white privilege, assuming that all ICE agents are just horribly racist and would shoot a black person on site, but would not shoot these white women.
	And so that was, I think, part of their understanding too.
	I think they're so indoctrinated with the bogus anti-racism narrative that they believe that their white skin would protect them from the consequences of interfering directly with law enforcement actions.
	So they actually believe that that's such an interesting, because Libby, you come from this sort of world of the left.
	They believe, right, because in canonical wokeness that if you are white, then police will let you do whatever you want because that is what they believe.
	And so as that would then follow that their whiteness would be a shield to them from any police activity.
	But it turns out that it's never been a shield against police activity.
	And the same way that it turns out that skin color has never been the predicate of police's behavior.
	It's always been the behavior of the individual predicates what a policeman's offer policeman or policewoman's behavior is going to be.
	And to the same point, Libby, have you seen a single one of these videos where, you know, I see it across X all the time where someone will say, oh my gosh, there's this terrible video.
	There's a 17-year-old in a target.
	There's a woman who's being drugged from her car.
	There's this, there's that.
	And then you watch the video and they're either not complying, they're obstructing, they're blocking the road, they're getting in the face of officers, they're taking swings at officers.
	They're always doing something and the people just lie about it.
	Yes, they are always doing something and the people just lie about it.
	And it's important to know, yes, we do have First Amendment rights.
	We can go out there and protest our government.
	We can petition our government for a redress of grievances.
	That is entirely within our right.
	But if you are out there and you are dallying with these lines and you are told to do something by police officers, just comply with police.
	You're going to get an arrest.
	You're going to be a hero among your friends.
	You know, Mark Ruffalo is going to sing your praises because you got arrested during the righteous cause.
	Just comply with police.
	It's the same thing that we all tell our kids.
	If you get pulled over when you're driving, you know, comply with police.
	Do what you are told.
	Don't make sudden movements.
	Don't give the police any reason to, you know, be concerned that you are a threat to them.
	And this is something that we all know, right?
	I mean, this is a lesson that we could all take from 15 years ago.
	Remember when everyone was going around about how they had to give their black children the talk, right?
	Give these liberal white ladies the talk.
	Just do what cops say and you're not going to get shot.
	You know, and Chris Rock used to have a great bit about this.
	You know, do you have any priors?
	You know, are you on drugs?
	Are you holding drugs?
	Don't do that.
	Just don't do that when you get pulled over.
	You better check before you do any of these things.
	And look, I always, I always say as well, you know, people, obviously my kids aren't old enough for this yet, but I always just say, guys, you want to argue, argue in court.
	All right.
	You want to argue, argue in court?
	Are you in paper?
	Make your argument later.
	Don't do it on the street.
	Literally, just don't do the street because it's as simple as that because you don't want to be there.
	They don't want to be there.
	You're in a bad situation.
	Obviously with ICE, you definitely don't want to be there.
	And you know something else?
	Really simple.
	If you're driving around Minneapolis and you don't want to get involved with ICE, then literally just go the other way.
	I was in Minneapolis for the whole time I was there.
	I didn't actually randomly run into ICE operations.
	They're seeking them out.
	They're following them.
	You got Will Stansel over on Blue Sky talking about how his 2011 Honda Fit can barely keep up with the ICE convoys.
	It's ridiculous.
	It's a joke.
	And people are doing this on purpose.
	But here's the thing, folks.
	We need to rip the bandaid off now.
	Get it done now.
	And we'll never have to worry about this crap again.
	Libby Emmons, where can people go to get your op-ed and follow your work?
	Well, I just want to say also that they're coordinating on signal chats and telling everyone where to go.
	You can find me on Twitter at Libby Emmons.
	You can check out all the work that we're doing at humanevents.com.
	And I would be glad if you go read my op-ed.
	Humanevents.com, check out Libby's op-ed.
	going back to the Supreme Court next here on Human Events.
	He's written a fantastic book.
	Everybody's talking about it.
	Go get it.
	And he's been my friend right from the beginning of this whole beautiful event.
	And we're going to turn it around and make her actually ready to get to him.
	Amen.
	All right, Jack Prussik, back live, Human Events Daily.
	Well, folks, we also, as much as the immigration enforcement operations are important, as much as we've been focused on them, traveling out to Minneapolis, still got field correspondents on the ground out there.
	We also have to walk and chew gum because there's this incredible ruling coming out soon, it appears, from the Supreme Court, a huge hearing that was held yesterday regarding trans athletes participating in women's sports.
	We threw together a kind of a quick impromptu panel here on all of this.
	We've got Erica Donalds from the American First Policy Institute.
	Erica, how are you?
	So good.
	Great to be here.
	Yesterday was an amazing day to see so much support.
	Well, it certainly was.
	And we saw everyone out there cheering at the Supreme Court.
	And then we've also got, of course, Paula Scanlon.
	She's a senior fellow over with the American Principals Project and also someone who was on the team at the swim team at UPenn with the trans man that really, really started all of this.
	Paula, what does it feel like to see this case go all the way to the Supreme Court?
	It feels really good.
	I think back then we saw that this was the only option.
	It was going to end up at the Supreme Court.
	The one thing I will say, and I've been repeating this to everyone, this is so silly to me.
	The fact that we have Supreme Court justices sitting there listening to arguments on is a man a man?
	Is a woman a woman?
	Should a man be included in the definition of woman?
	It's just insanity.
	But again, I'm glad it's being heard and I'm looking forward to a favorable decision coming up soon.
	Well, I think that is going to happen.
	Erica, over at AFPI, you guys have been putting out so much work regarding this issue.
	Talk to us about how the trans issue really has become the tentpole issue for the leftist agenda.
	It has.
	And unfortunately for them, however, recent polling shows that it has become a 70-30 issue, even amongst Democrats and independents, where people do not want their daughters and the women in their lives to be put in danger with men and boys, not just in their sports and taking their spaces on athletic teams, but in their locker rooms where there are unsafe conditions for those young women.
	So America First Policy Institute, as you mentioned, as well as many others, and we're talking about gays, lesbians, Republicans, Democrats, all together.
	You saw it yesterday at the rally coming together against this and asking the Supreme Court to uphold the original intention of Title IX.
	Paula, talk to me now about, so the one of the pieces, and I'm reading some of the transcripts that are coming out of the court, that they're talking about is would this disturb laws and policies in other states that require schools to allow trans students to compete on teams that quote align with their gender identity?
	And certainly now the DOJ is trying to say that this wouldn't affect that, that these bans wouldn't necessarily affect those.
	But Paula, look, you are in Pennsylvania, which was allowing this and is not one of the states where that is that has a ban on it.
	Josh Shapiro, the governor there, certainly isn't going to be passing that anytime soon.
	Talk to me about what it was like to be on a team and forced to share a locker room with a biological male.
	You know, it's as horrible as people imagine it is.
	It's not just competitively unfair to be on a team with a man who's obviously much larger.
	I mean, this was a six foot four tall individual that we're talking about.
	But the locker room was something a lot of people didn't consider.
	Even my own parents, I don't think, properly understood the fact that this guy was undressing in front of us, fully intact male, had done nothing to become a woman at all, undressing in front of us, not once or twice, but 18 times per week.
	We were fully undressing in front of this man.
	And we were told that if we objected to it or had any problems with it, that we were the problem.
	And they told us to go seek psychological services.
	I mean, that's what girls across the country are being forced when this is going on.
	And that's why the Supreme Court case is so important, not just for athletes and competitive fairness, but also for the safety and privacy of young girls in this whole country.
	And that's really what is riding on this case.
	And that's, and that's so that's would be my response to the blue state argument.
	And Erica, to bring you back in here, wasn't that the entire point of Title IX to begin with?
	This basic idea that women should have their rights protected?
	Yes, it is common sense that women need their own sports categories in order to compete at all.
	Because taken to the extreme, allowing young men to compete on the women's team will eventually eliminate women from competition completely, taking away their scholarships, their opportunities, their trophies, as has already happened.
	It's absolutely unfair.
	It's the reason why women fought so hard for Title IX to ensure opportunities for our young women.
	As a former only high school athlete, Paula, obviously, incredible college athlete.
	And I just commend her for her bravery, her courage to stand up to this mob.
	I know this is what motivates women.
	It gives them confidence.
	We show that actually young athletes, young women athletes, become CEOs, become leaders in business, and taking that away from them is absolutely not the intention of the law.
	No, it's certainly not.
	Paula, you know, switching back to you here, when you look at these arguments, and I know that you've been looking at the case, it does look like the Supreme Court is going to come down here, Amy Coney Barrett, Clarence Thomas getting in there.
	Do you think that the, and you know, that the those people supporting the trans students, did they even make their case?
	You know, watching the arguments yesterday, I felt like I felt genuinely embarrassed.
	I mean, there's no other way to explain what's going on here.
	They even said, though, that they aren't prepared to define sex.
	If we can't define sex, then how are we sex discriminated?
	Should we just have an open category?
	Why do we even have women's sports if nobody knows what a woman is?
	And the other side was not able to present that in their case.
	And so the bottom line is: man is man, woman is woman.
	There's a lot of complexities going on in this case they want to bring up, but that's really what this boils down to.
	And if we agree that men are men and women are women, case closed, shut, women's sports are for women.
	Let's move on.
	But for some reason, we have to talk in circles and pretend like nobody knows what a woman is.
	Well, and we really saw this as well, because in so many of the instances, they weren't really talking about athletes.
	They were actually getting into these biological questions.
	They were getting into these deep questions.
	Erica, why is it that the left is so beholden to this issue?
	Well, they are beholden to the radical side of their party, unfortunately, but they like to turn the conversation into individual circumstances.
	And we all have compassion for people who are confused about their gender and they feel excluded, but we cannot make laws around one individual's person or a man's feelings or a young boy's feelings.
	We have to make laws that are fair and equitable for everyone.
	and frankly that protect the safety sanctity and rights of our young women and girls that's the way the law should go that's the way i think the supreme court will rule on these it will uphold states rights to separate the sexes when it comes to athletics but we need to go even further and ensure a clear definition of title iX when it comes to biological sex how someone was born that is where they should compete And it makes perfect sense to me.
	It seems like common sense.
	Paula, I wanted to know if you had thought it was interesting at all that Judge Kavanaugh, some of his comments, giving the fact that with his background, he himself was a coach of a girls basketball team.
	You know, I think it's so interesting when people try to bring that stuff up.
	But I will say, it doesn't matter who's coaching teams.
	I've had male coaches.
	I've had female coaches.
	Women's teams are for women.
	Men's teams are for boys.
	It's such a silly argument that we're even having this conversation.
	And the entire case hearing yesterday, the one thing going through my mind the entire time was I cannot believe Supreme Court justices, again, are sitting here listening to something so silly, studying to become lawyers, going through clerkships to sit there for a few hours listening to some whiny person complain about how they don't know what a boy or a girl is.
	Yeah, and it's just amazing because they'll say, well, what background do you have?
	And you said, well, he literally was the coach of a girls sports team.
	He's like, and he's now on the Supreme Court.
	It's so amazing.
	And just like us on this panel, by the way, we've got Poso, and I'm outnumbered here on my own show.
	I have to talk to the producers about who booked this panel.
	We check that out next time.
	Paula Scanlon, where could people go to get access to you and your coordinates?
	I'm pretty big on X, so make sure to follow me there, Paula Y. Scanlon.
	Keep up with what I'm up to.
	Of course, Erica Donalds.
	Yes, at Erica Donalds, Erica with a K and ericadonald.com.
	All right.
	Make sure you're following them both to absolute champions for their cause, which is the cause of reality and the cause of common sense.

▲