Organic or Paid?

~ Clarissa

What sense does it make that people would turn out by the million organically to support policies that impoverish them? Not much. I’ve spent 98% of my time in North America in very leftist circles. I have heard people express sincere and passionate support for all kinds of very extremist policies and ideas. But I’ve never heard anybody passionately go on about the need for more illegal immigrants.

Open borders are crucial for people who drive down labor costs by using immigrant labor. These are rich people. Are they paying for these protests?

I hate it when people attribute every protest to paid agitators. Most protests are sincere. The BLM riots were completely sincere for most participants. But these anti-ICE protests are completely different.

This is why I keep saying that somebody needs to investigate Renee Good’s history of employment. Somebody needs to find out why she moved to Minneapolis. We are wasting our time poring over video clips when there’s a set of huge, pulsating, unanswered questions.

The more such situations there are, the likelier it is that somebody gets hurt. Unless the root of the situation is extirpated, there will be more hurt civilians or police.

Unknown's avatar

Published by Clarissa

49 thoughts on “Organic or Paid?”

  1. If we make it through, the heroes of this generation will be accountants.

    If we don’t, I suppose they’ll be warlords.

    -ethyl

    Like

    Reply

    1. Does anybody even care about the daycare fraud anymore or has it been completely eclipsed by all this? I’m very worried nothing will change. Tim Walz us probably already regretting dropping out of the race because the fraud story seems to have been displaced on everybody’s attention.

      Like

      Reply

      1. That’s the whole point, right? Bad press? Force a turnover in the news cycle so everybody forgets.

        -ethyl

        Like

        Reply

  2. “I’ve never heard anybody passionately go on about the need for more illegal immigrants”

    Not in those words, but

    “No one is illegal” or the old line about someone “isn’t arguing for open borders” are tells that someone doesn’t want to keep out illegal aliens (and may be against deporting anyone ever for any reason).

    The base of the openborders agenda are boogy liberals who have all the right opinions (but don’t think those opinions through very far).

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  3. Organic or Paid: definitely paid. This also points toward your question of how did this woman get involved:

    https://nypost.com/2026/01/08/us-news/renee-nicole-good-was-minneapolis-ice-watch-warrior-who-trained-to-resist-feds-before-shooting/

    “Good, who moved to the city last year, linked up with the anti-ICE activists through her 6-year-old son’s woke charter school, which boasts that it puts “social justice first” and prioritizes “involving kids in political and social activism,” multiple local sources said.“

    That she got involved through her kid’s school is… oof. The school helped make that kid an orphan.

    -ethyl

    Like

    Reply

    2. Thank you, this is very interesting.

      What I don’t get is why she’s constantly referred to as “a mother of three” when there’s only this one 6-year-old she had with her dead husband? Who are the other two children and where are they?

      The article supports my initial assumption that this woman didn’t have a job. It also says she’s been quite itinerant, moving from MO to Canada to Minneapolis within a very short time span. This means she’s completely financially dependent. But on whom? The girlfriend? What were they living on in Canada? I hope information continues to trickle out.

      Like

      Reply

      1. Best guesses:

        -the other two kids belong to the “partner”.

        -she has two kids from some previous relationship, in custody of dad

        -the other two kids don’t exist.

        -some other typical modern temporary-relationships confusion where there are two other kids she refers to as hers because she lived with them for a time.

        Like

        Reply

        1. The whole trajectory of this family, man. Dad dies at a very young age. Within months, the wife becomes a lesbian, moves a girlfriend in, starts dragging the kid around country and state lines. This is a traumatized kid who lost his dad at age 4. A kid who needs stability even more than all other 4-year-olds. Now his mom is dead. This means another move for him. He loses all the friends he made at his new school. That poor, poor child. My heart bleeds for him.

          Like

          Reply

            1. Yeah, I’m hearing “Drive! (unintelligible) Drive drive!” from the GF– I wonder if that qualifies as incitement. And it *sounds like* the car actually makes contact with the officer too. This was not totally clear in the two other angles I frame-by-framed. Like maybe, but wouldn’t bet money on it. It seems more likely in this one.

              -ethyl

              Like

              Reply

              1. What reason did she have to start driving? She was sitting there, smiling, not panicking, not confused, not in distress. What is an alternative explanation for her to start driving all of a sudden if not to hit this guy?

                Also, the dog. Why was the dog there? Who brings a dog to this sort of a drive? Is the dog even ok?

                Like

      4. I’ve seen a few sympathetic descriptions of the family now, and they only mention the 6yo. So assuming “mother of three” is correct, that looks more like a non-custodial-mom situation.

        If you know anything about US family courts, that tells you a lot. None of it good.

        -ethyl

        Like

        Reply

          1. It pretty much has to be abandonment, physical abuse, really obvious mental illness, or drugs (and drugs can be very difficult to prove). You’d think serious neglect would get you there… but I have never seen it work in court, except in combination with provable drug abuse (as in, they got arrested for it and it’s public record).

            -ethyl

            Liked by 1 person

            Reply

            1. She seems like an impulsive person, given the dramatic change of sexual orientation and an embrace of activism. Maybe she simply left them to go off with the new guy (the second husband).

              People keep trying to position her as just a regular mom but there’s nothing regular about this story.

              Like

              Reply

    1. What gets me about all this is, back in the 90s when the militia movement was all the rage, half the membership seemed to be fed informants. Right-wing militia organizers couldn’t use the toilet without having a report sent off to the FBI about it.

      Where is the surveillance on all this?

      I only see two reasonable explanations:

      -our federal agencies have been DEI’d to death, and are incapable of infiltrating anything anymore.

      -our federal agencies are in on it.

      -ethyl

      Like

      Reply

    2. Thank you, this is very enlightening!

      I have colleagues who went on all BLM protests. I have colleagues who go every Friday to the local anti-Trump protest. I know people who got beat up at the pro-Palestinian protests in STL. This is who I’m surrounded with. And although the BLM, for example, was absolutely funded in part, I’m completely certain that most of the protest energy behind that and the pro-Palestinian and the anti-Trump is completely sincere, unpaid and organic.

      This anti-ICE thing, though, feels different. I’m not saying none of it is organic but my instinct is that it’s enormously less organic than the pro-Palestinian or the BLM. I know people who went to those and I’m 100% certain they weren’t paid. It’s a completely different energy with the anti-ICE protests. They look professional in a way that our local weekly anti-Trump protest just isn’t.

      Like

      Reply

  5. I think you are looking at it too narrowly. It is not about immigration any more. It is about a powerful federal police force (for a lack of a better term) that had undergone rapid expansion with certain agenda in mind. As a result of the rapid expansion per se the significant fraction of the force is poorly trained. And as a result of the declared agenda the force disproportionally contains the following two categories of people: a) right wingers who subscribe to the whole agenda, not just about immigration and b) completely unprincipled mercs.

    One does not have to support unlimited immigration to be extremely uncomfortable with such a force operating without sufficient checks and balances.

    Like

    Reply

    1. If people are really worked about the expansion of federal police, then why isn’t anybody talking about it? The same people who can’t shut up about every protest they attend never mention this or post anything on FB or anything. Who goes if not the same people who go on the rest of these protests?

      Like

      Reply

        1. I’m so glad to get a confirmation that I’m not alone in feeling this. It’s a completely different energy from these protests.

          Part of it is where people protest. Normally, you go where you are comfortable. Pro-Palestinian protests were on campuses because that’s where students and professors are. The anti-Trump protests are in the town square. Of the town where protesters live. Race rioters trash their own neighborhoods.

          For regular people to organize these mobile rapid-response units is strange. To be able to dispose of their time so easily means they must have no jobs. None of this looks natural.

          Like

          Reply

    1. Please, everybody, watch and appreciate the plight of my everyday life where this is 100% of people I’m surrounded with at long, unavoidable meetings.

      Like

      Reply

  7. cliff arroyo

    LOL, I believe that the scientific term for that behavior is Bat Shit Crazy. And the problem is that she not only imagines herself to be morally superior, but worse, far, far worse, she has been given a vote ;-D

    Like

    Reply

  9. Here is what an actual former law enforcement investigator says about this shooting:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QC0YaWTfV3A&t=286s

    Like I said, ICE was in the wrong here. Officer put himself in front of the vehicle and nobody was in any immediate danger. This woman was attempting to flee, and that is not a sentenced of death to be carried out immediately.

    Clarissa assertions that MAYBE she could have hurt someone else later shows a clear lack of understanding of the law and acceptable use of force. I’m glad you’re not a cop Clarissa. You’d be shooting people every day left and right because they MAY cause trouble down the line.

    Like

    Reply

    1. It’s hard to have a conversation when people accuse one of being capable of shooting people. Please note that I made zero ad hominem attacks in this discussion.

      Like

      Reply

        1. During the Michael Brown riots, I had the standard liberal objections of, why didn’t he shoot Brown in the leg, why didn’t he try to avoid a fatal outcome. I’m a civilian, I don’t know from guns. I never even saw one in RL. But I’m not incapable of learning. When I found out that officers are trained to shoot into the center of the mass, I took that information in.

          Like

          Reply

      2. I keep asking, would you step on the gas if a police officer is opening the door and asking you to get out while another stands in front of the car? I’m very certain that not a single person in this discussion would do something like it. But why not? If police normally react calmly to this behavior and just stand there meekly while you do it, then why not? What are we playing at here, pretending that we routinely do this kind of thing when in reality if police stops us, we sit there very quietly, waiting for them to approach, keep our hands in the wheel, roll down the window when told to and most definitely don’t start driving without being told to do so?

        Like

        Reply

        1. There is no doubt this woman was wrong to attempt to flee, but like I keep saying, that does not merit a death sentence and shooting her in the face was not acceptable use of force.

          You keep saying a bunch of stuff that are true. Clearly she should not have tried to flee, clearly she may have been missing a few screws, nobody is arguing against that. Also, nobody is arguing she should not have faced any consequences. They had her face, license plate number, and they could have easily charged her and nabbed her later on, that is the standard practice and would have been the end of it. Instead that ICE officer got himself in front of the car and in a dangerous situation, escalated the situation, then shot her not only once, but twice more once she was already past him because she wanted her dead.

          Like

          Reply

          1. On the “twice more” see above links on reaction times.

            Cops are humans, not superman or Neo from the matrix. They can’t do the “bullet time” thing.

            -ethyl

            Like

            Reply

              1. If you don’t want to read the study or commentary, just say so. They’re *about* the training, and physiological reaction times which are not under conscious control.

                It’s OK if you disagree with the premises, have contradicting data, whatever. I’d love to look at it, if you have it.

                -ethyl

                Liked by 2 people

  10. Two actual venezuelan criminals actually rammed their car into ICE officers and got shot but it barely made the news. Zero reaction from rightoids, no celebrations, nothing. Which only reinforces my point I made earlier that MAGAtards hate white women. It’s pathological with them.

    Like

    Reply

Leave a comment