If a viewer is motivated to believe Ross, then they will take the moment where the phone jerks upward as an indication that Ross was hit by the vehicle. Viewed in isolation, that video would allow someone to believe the narrative reported by Noem and Vance.
I just watched a documentary about women war correspondents in WWII. One of the current war correspondents said that when she arrives at a scene of conflict, one of the first things she does is look for someone she identifies as being her equivalent in that place and situation to give her a point-of-view she can connect with.
MAGA's version of that is to put themselves in the shoes of the ICE/BP enforcers and impute good faith to them and bad faith to the people who are obstacles to the enforcers. With that as a starting point, this video will justify Ross violence in their minds.
The converse, that ICE/BP are acting in bad faith, is too disturbing to contemplate.
Regarding Greenland, Trump has already won. Namely because 'serious' people are seriously discussing the scenario of an annexation. Trump saw Greenland on a map once, decided that it would be 'nice to have it' and now op-eds are being written about the history of Greenland, its relationship to Denmark and how a US takeover might go down.
There is nothing to discuss whatsoever, this should not even be thought about, it's completely ridiculous. And yet, we are talking about it...
I'm trying to figure out why anyone in the Trump administration, particularly JD Vance, thought Jonathan Ross's phone video supported their version of the story. It's bizarre.
Dude was holding his phone the whole time, while they claim he was hit by the car and while he was shooting. It also clearly shows her turning her steering wheel hard to the right. Good and her wife weren't at all menacing, just lightheartedly mocking Ross.
I think this is more about rare earths, strategic positioning and what it is going to cost to do what is necessary to keep China and Russia at bay.
It is well to remember that "rare earths" are not, in point of fact, rare. Certainly there are places with greater amounts (bits of Greenland among them). But the reason they are rare is just that it is extremely difficult (and, with current technology, highly polluting) to separate them from each other.
If you don't care about the pollution, you could refine them in Wyoming, Missouri, or California -- all of which have significant deposits. As it is, mines in those places do minimal processing, and then ship the concentrate to Chnia for refining. That's why China dominates rare earths -- they're indifferent to the pollution caused by refining them.
If Trump annexes Greenland, the real risk is the high pollution refining which he (or those he sells it to) will cheerfully site where US (or European) pollution restrictions suddenly don't reach.
“Historically”, however, meaning as recently as 2023, Denmark was below the NATO 2% standard. And a low of 1.11% in 2015. Slid below 2% in 1990 down to that low in 2015. So yes, historically.
Yes, 2015 was when Trump was in the GOP debate and praising Putin's intelligence and desire for a stable world. My point is that it's cherry picking of the first order and doing that to argue for Orange shitstain's latest fantasy is pretty weak.
Denmark was at the time occupied by an enemy nation.
And that European problem became a world war.
If you think Trump (and much of the current GOP) is more aware of the threat from Russia than the Europeans are . . .
Using the word ‘historically’ is pretty interesting, especially since Denmark is one of the top bilateral donors to Ukraine . . .
Actions speak louder than words (well, unless its Trump, lol). Yes, Europe is finally getting serious and starting to put its money where its mouth is, rather than relying on the US taxpayers. It's nice to see. And yes, Denmark is one of the top donors to Ukraine. I think it might actually be right at the top as a percentage of GDP. "Historically", however, meaning as recently as 2023, Denmark was below the NATO 2% standard. And a low of 1.11% in 2015. Slid below 2% in 1990 down to that low in 2015. So yes, historically.
Are you by any chance falling into what I will call the “McKinney Trap” . . .
In my own way, I may consider many here to be a different version of summer children on some issues, but I don't think anyone actually supports the CCP. Unless you voted for Bernie, Zohran, Waltz et.al. Then I might have a few questions.
It’s almost as if you haven’t been observing the Trump administration in action,
I've been observing the results achieved, the rhetoric and the resistance. IMO, many are falling for the rhetoric. If this isn't prodding, it's the Art of the Deal, trying to get a better bargaining position IMO for a minerals deal. Not only do I not like the rhetoric and the disrespect, I think it backfires here. We shall see.
Are there any instances in which Denmark has refused to co-operate with the USA over collective security in Greenland?
Denmark tried to get the US to leave after WWII, leading to the 1951 treaty (US refused to leave due to the Soviet threat). But I think this is more about rare earths, strategic positioning and what it is going to cost to do what is necessary to keep China and Russia at bay. And a concern that Greenland has, I understand, toyed with deals involving the Chinese in infrastructure and mining. Denmark has vetoed the projects. With the Chinese trying to monopolize rare earths, having the Chinese involved in mining is obviously a huge concern, and one that could be dealt with by getting a minerals agreement with the US. It makes sense to have some sort of economic deal to offset US defense costs. Threats of invasion are unhelpful, to say the least.
For anyone interested in what kind of poet she was in life, this is Renee Good's poem from 2020 which won "one of Old Dominion’s most prestigious accolades, the Academy of American Poets Prize":
If the US leaves NATO, I wonder if Canada will withdraw from the bilateral arrangements.
Which would deliver the pretense for the intended annexation.
It's insane but that's the kind of logic I expect those people.
Btw, I do not believe for a moment that Canada in that scenario would receive statehood since that would almost guarantee a Dem takeover of both house and senate.
Once an annexation of Greenland leads to the break-up of NATO, Canada would probably be seen as an easier target than now.
The US and Canada have mutual defense agreements that pre-date NATO and are still in place. NORAD, for example, falls under those agreements rather than NATO. If the US leaves NATO, I wonder if Canada will withdraw from the bilateral arrangements.
I have to think the administration is betting on cleek's step #3 happening soon and will do everything they can to ensure it happens or at least find a way to convince people that it has.
You know it's bad when you have Bulgarian friends checking in with you and saying how much they are glad that they did not emigrate to the US - all while worrying about Putin in their own back yard.
1) law enforcement (or some kind) does something abhorrent
2) people get angry about #1, Democrats benefit
3) somebody does something abhorrent in response
4) the conversation changes to #3, Republicans benefit
To me, shocking as the murder, it is even more shocking that people in Minneapolis can't go about their routine lives anymore without running into harassment by shit tons of ICE border patrol prosecutors and, apparently, armed militias who have empowered themselves to join it. And this is being covered with headlines about "surges" in response to "protests breaking out" language that assumes the invasion by Trump forces is legit while supposedly there is something scary about the protests.
I desperately hope the people of Minn can stay nonviolent. When the George Floyd protests degenerated into riots, that movement died and all that was accomplished was help for the Republicans in the midterms.
wjca, The original plans to acquire Greenland was to put Canada into a pincer between newly acquired Alaska, the US and Greenland and then to take over either by persuasive coercion or outright violence.
At the moment I do not believe Canada to be in play yet. Once an annexation of Greenland leads to the break-up of NATO, Canada would probably be seen as an easier target than now.
Having contributed money to all sorts of Dems over the years, I am bombarded with fundraising emails, texts, and the occasional phone call even. I'm sure many of you are in the same boat. So I'm asking for advice here:
Is there an effective way to communicate to candidates begging for "help to meet our goal before the FCC deadline tomorrow" and similar pitches? Specifically, to say something like "Publicly and loudly declare that deMAGAfication is your first priority, and then you get my support"?
I know campaigns need money to "get their message out" but if it's a namby-pamby let's-not-offend-anybody consultant-generated message, they can kiss my ass.
What cleek, russell, hsh and wj said. And coincidentally I've been listening to Phil Ochs for the first time in a long time, but I'd never heard this, which seems appropriate to the times:
I had that epiphany in 1968. The GOP took up the Lost Cause banner and combined it with their feed the rich ideology to embark on the road to fascism. Protestors gunned down at Kent State, now Minneapolis. I don't know about you, but I detect a pattern.
My own point of view is that ICE and the CBP in their current form need to be disbanded. They are a public menace. We need to manage immigration, but not like this. Shut it down and start over from a clean slate.
My inclination would be to shut them down and lay off everybody working at either. Those who worked there pre-Trump are welcome to reapply. But no promises. Those hired under a Trump administration? Don't even bother to apply, because that's an automatic reject.
The pattern I see, and I would expect everyone else here sees, is that this administration, when they aren't going after imaginary problems, find solutions to real problems that are worse than the problems. That or they have solutions that might work, but they execute them in such a thoughtless and hamfisted way that the solutions still end up being worse than the problems.
ICE is going into our cities and making things far worse than they would be if ICE instead sat around playing cards in a warehouse. They aren't catching nearly enough truly dangerous people. On the contrary, ICE are truly dangerous people. And it's not entirely their fault. It's partly due to the dumbasses in charge putting them in situations they're ill-suited for.
"The killing of Renee Good is truly shocking – could this be a tipping point?"
I second cleek's "nah".
Based on the reaction so far, folks are generally responding to Good's killing exactly as you might predict.
MAGAs and right-leaning people in general respond with some mixture of "she tried to kill the cop", "she should have complied", "she had no business being there in the first place". Or just that old favorite, FAFO.
Folks holding, for lack of a better term, a progressive point of view see it as further evidence of an autocratic regime gone out of bounds.
Folks who, for whatever reason, don't want to line up on one side or the other generally think it's terrible, a shame that such things "happen".
Most news sources stick to a neutral stance. Either "this happened' with no further comment, or some version of "both sides".
I don't think this will move the needle, in any direction.
My own point of view is that ICE and the CBP in their current form need to be disbanded. They are a public menace. We need to manage immigration, but not like this. Shut it down and start over from a clean slate.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.
On “2026, as f**ked up as 2025”
We are on the same page, novakant. One more way that the media continues to normalize the caprice of Clementine Caligula.
On “An open thread”
If a viewer is motivated to believe Ross, then they will take the moment where the phone jerks upward as an indication that Ross was hit by the vehicle. Viewed in isolation, that video would allow someone to believe the narrative reported by Noem and Vance.
I just watched a documentary about women war correspondents in WWII. One of the current war correspondents said that when she arrives at a scene of conflict, one of the first things she does is look for someone she identifies as being her equivalent in that place and situation to give her a point-of-view she can connect with.
MAGA's version of that is to put themselves in the shoes of the ICE/BP enforcers and impute good faith to them and bad faith to the people who are obstacles to the enforcers. With that as a starting point, this video will justify Ross violence in their minds.
The converse, that ICE/BP are acting in bad faith, is too disturbing to contemplate.
"
particularly JD Vance
He isn't the brightest bulb in the chandelier - the US is ruled by Bif Tannens.
On “2026, as f**ked up as 2025”
Regarding Greenland, Trump has already won. Namely because 'serious' people are seriously discussing the scenario of an annexation. Trump saw Greenland on a map once, decided that it would be 'nice to have it' and now op-eds are being written about the history of Greenland, its relationship to Denmark and how a US takeover might go down.
There is nothing to discuss whatsoever, this should not even be thought about, it's completely ridiculous. And yet, we are talking about it...
On “An open thread”
I'm trying to figure out why anyone in the Trump administration, particularly JD Vance, thought Jonathan Ross's phone video supported their version of the story. It's bizarre.
Dude was holding his phone the whole time, while they claim he was hit by the car and while he was shooting. It also clearly shows her turning her steering wheel hard to the right. Good and her wife weren't at all menacing, just lightheartedly mocking Ross.
I don't know what people think they're seeing.
On “2026, as f**ked up as 2025”
"If this isn’t prodding, it’s the Art of the Deal"
You realize, I hope, that The Art Of The Deal was a ghost written piece of Trump fluffing bullshit.
Right? Just ask the guy that wrote it. Who now regrets it.
On “An open thread”
" I have to think the administration is betting on cleek’s step #3"
Stephen Miller has wet dreams about invoking martial law.
On “2026, as f**ked up as 2025”
'I don’t think anyone actually supports the CCP. Unless you voted for Bernie, Zohran, Waltz et.al"
I voted for Walz as VP.
Go ahead and try to claim I support thee CCP. Or that I'm a summer child, in any way, shape or from.
"
It is well to remember that "rare earths" are not, in point of fact, rare. Certainly there are places with greater amounts (bits of Greenland among them). But the reason they are rare is just that it is extremely difficult (and, with current technology, highly polluting) to separate them from each other.
If you don't care about the pollution, you could refine them in Wyoming, Missouri, or California -- all of which have significant deposits. As it is, mines in those places do minimal processing, and then ship the concentrate to Chnia for refining. That's why China dominates rare earths -- they're indifferent to the pollution caused by refining them.
If Trump annexes Greenland, the real risk is the high pollution refining which he (or those he sells it to) will cheerfully site where US (or European) pollution restrictions suddenly don't reach.
"
“Historically”, however, meaning as recently as 2023, Denmark was below the NATO 2% standard. And a low of 1.11% in 2015. Slid below 2% in 1990 down to that low in 2015. So yes, historically.
Yes, 2015 was when Trump was in the GOP debate and praising Putin's intelligence and desire for a stable world. My point is that it's cherry picking of the first order and doing that to argue for Orange shitstain's latest fantasy is pretty weak.
"
Denmark was at the time occupied by an enemy nation.
And that European problem became a world war.
If you think Trump (and much of the current GOP) is more aware of the threat from Russia than the Europeans are . . .
Using the word ‘historically’ is pretty interesting, especially since Denmark is one of the top bilateral donors to Ukraine . . .
Actions speak louder than words (well, unless its Trump, lol). Yes, Europe is finally getting serious and starting to put its money where its mouth is, rather than relying on the US taxpayers. It's nice to see. And yes, Denmark is one of the top donors to Ukraine. I think it might actually be right at the top as a percentage of GDP. "Historically", however, meaning as recently as 2023, Denmark was below the NATO 2% standard. And a low of 1.11% in 2015. Slid below 2% in 1990 down to that low in 2015. So yes, historically.
Are you by any chance falling into what I will call the “McKinney Trap” . . .
In my own way, I may consider many here to be a different version of summer children on some issues, but I don't think anyone actually supports the CCP. Unless you voted for Bernie, Zohran, Waltz et.al. Then I might have a few questions.
It’s almost as if you haven’t been observing the Trump administration in action,
I've been observing the results achieved, the rhetoric and the resistance. IMO, many are falling for the rhetoric. If this isn't prodding, it's the Art of the Deal, trying to get a better bargaining position IMO for a minerals deal. Not only do I not like the rhetoric and the disrespect, I think it backfires here. We shall see.
Are there any instances in which Denmark has refused to co-operate with the USA over collective security in Greenland?
Denmark tried to get the US to leave after WWII, leading to the 1951 treaty (US refused to leave due to the Soviet threat). But I think this is more about rare earths, strategic positioning and what it is going to cost to do what is necessary to keep China and Russia at bay. And a concern that Greenland has, I understand, toyed with deals involving the Chinese in infrastructure and mining. Denmark has vetoed the projects. With the Chinese trying to monopolize rare earths, having the Chinese involved in mining is obviously a huge concern, and one that could be dealt with by getting a minerals agreement with the US. It makes sense to have some sort of economic deal to offset US defense costs. Threats of invasion are unhelpful, to say the least.
On “An open thread”
For anyone interested in what kind of poet she was in life, this is Renee Good's poem from 2020 which won "one of Old Dominion’s most prestigious accolades, the Academy of American Poets Prize":
https://poets.org/2020-on-learning-to-dissect-fetal-pigs
On “Moving towards Epiphany”
If the US leaves NATO, I wonder if Canada will withdraw from the bilateral arrangements.
Which would deliver the pretense for the intended annexation.
It's insane but that's the kind of logic I expect those people.
Btw, I do not believe for a moment that Canada in that scenario would receive statehood since that would almost guarantee a Dem takeover of both house and senate.
"
Once an annexation of Greenland leads to the break-up of NATO, Canada would probably be seen as an easier target than now.
The US and Canada have mutual defense agreements that pre-date NATO and are still in place. NORAD, for example, falls under those agreements rather than NATO. If the US leaves NATO, I wonder if Canada will withdraw from the bilateral arrangements.
On “An open thread”
I have to think the administration is betting on cleek's step #3 happening soon and will do everything they can to ensure it happens or at least find a way to convince people that it has.
(Sorry if I'm stating the obvious.)
"
You know it's bad when you have Bulgarian friends checking in with you and saying how much they are glad that they did not emigrate to the US - all while worrying about Putin in their own back yard.
"
there's a way these things work:
1) law enforcement (or some kind) does something abhorrent
2) people get angry about #1, Democrats benefit
3) somebody does something abhorrent in response
4) the conversation changes to #3, Republicans benefit
we're at step #2 right now.
"
To me, shocking as the murder, it is even more shocking that people in Minneapolis can't go about their routine lives anymore without running into harassment by shit tons of ICE border patrol prosecutors and, apparently, armed militias who have empowered themselves to join it. And this is being covered with headlines about "surges" in response to "protests breaking out" language that assumes the invasion by Trump forces is legit while supposedly there is something scary about the protests.
I desperately hope the people of Minn can stay nonviolent. When the George Floyd protests degenerated into riots, that movement died and all that was accomplished was help for the Republicans in the midterms.
On “Moving towards Epiphany”
wjca, The original plans to acquire Greenland was to put Canada into a pincer between newly acquired Alaska, the US and Greenland and then to take over either by persuasive coercion or outright violence.
At the moment I do not believe Canada to be in play yet. Once an annexation of Greenland leads to the break-up of NATO, Canada would probably be seen as an easier target than now.
On “An open thread”
Having contributed money to all sorts of Dems over the years, I am bombarded with fundraising emails, texts, and the occasional phone call even. I'm sure many of you are in the same boat. So I'm asking for advice here:
Is there an effective way to communicate to candidates begging for "help to meet our goal before the FCC deadline tomorrow" and similar pitches? Specifically, to say something like "Publicly and loudly declare that deMAGAfication is your first priority, and then you get my support"?
I know campaigns need money to "get their message out" but if it's a namby-pamby let's-not-offend-anybody consultant-generated message, they can kiss my ass.
So: any suggestions?
--TP
"
What cleek, russell, hsh and wj said. And coincidentally I've been listening to Phil Ochs for the first time in a long time, but I'd never heard this, which seems appropriate to the times:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fgrehW44g5s
On “Moving towards Epiphany”
I had that epiphany in 1968. The GOP took up the Lost Cause banner and combined it with their feed the rich ideology to embark on the road to fascism. Protestors gunned down at Kent State, now Minneapolis. I don't know about you, but I detect a pattern.
On “An open thread”
My inclination would be to shut them down and lay off everybody working at either. Those who worked there pre-Trump are welcome to reapply. But no promises. Those hired under a Trump administration? Don't even bother to apply, because that's an automatic reject.
"
The pattern I see, and I would expect everyone else here sees, is that this administration, when they aren't going after imaginary problems, find solutions to real problems that are worse than the problems. That or they have solutions that might work, but they execute them in such a thoughtless and hamfisted way that the solutions still end up being worse than the problems.
ICE is going into our cities and making things far worse than they would be if ICE instead sat around playing cards in a warehouse. They aren't catching nearly enough truly dangerous people. On the contrary, ICE are truly dangerous people. And it's not entirely their fault. It's partly due to the dumbasses in charge putting them in situations they're ill-suited for.
"
"The killing of Renee Good is truly shocking – could this be a tipping point?"
I second cleek's "nah".
Based on the reaction so far, folks are generally responding to Good's killing exactly as you might predict.
MAGAs and right-leaning people in general respond with some mixture of "she tried to kill the cop", "she should have complied", "she had no business being there in the first place". Or just that old favorite, FAFO.
Folks holding, for lack of a better term, a progressive point of view see it as further evidence of an autocratic regime gone out of bounds.
Folks who, for whatever reason, don't want to line up on one side or the other generally think it's terrible, a shame that such things "happen".
Most news sources stick to a neutral stance. Either "this happened' with no further comment, or some version of "both sides".
I don't think this will move the needle, in any direction.
My own point of view is that ICE and the CBP in their current form need to be disbanded. They are a public menace. We need to manage immigration, but not like this. Shut it down and start over from a clean slate.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.