However, as the sun set over the protests in Minneapolis, a very different narrative was being broadcast from the highest levels of federal power. President Donald Trump, speaking with his characteristic defiance, took to the airwaves and social media to offer a full-throated defense of the ICE agents involved. Rather than offering condolences, the President redirected the blame toward the deceased, labeling Good a “professional agitator” and a threat to national security.4 In his view, the shooting was a textbook case of self-defense against a person who had allegedly sought to obstruct the vital work of federal officers. By framing Good as a willing participant in a broader movement of “domestic terrorism,” the President effectively signaled that his administration would offer no apologies for the lethal use of force in the pursuit of border and interior enforcement.
This rhetoric was swiftly reinforced by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which issued a formal statement characterizing the driver’s actions as an act of domestic terrorism. The department’s narrative suggested that the vehicle was being used as a weapon, justifying the agents’ decision to open fire. This official stance provided the legal and administrative shield for the officers involved, ensuring that the federal government would stand as a monolith against local prosecution or civil unrest. Continue reading…
