MONDAY, JANUARY 12, 2026
The insult that hasn't quite barked: This morning, starting at 6:17, Joe and Mika reported the classic insulting remark.
It was the last comment recorded on the 47-second videotape recorded by Jonathan Ross. As we noted in Saturday's report, the 47-second videotape went public last Friday. Last Wednesday morning, someone present at the scene had made the remark a second or two after Renee Good was fatally shot.
Good's car was still rolling down the street when the comment was recorded. This morning, featuring one or two misstatements by Joe, here's what the Morning Joe co-hosts reported about the remark:
BRZEZINSKI (1/12/26): Then [Good] was called an "F-ing B" after he [Ross] shot her.
SCARBOROUGH: After he killed her, after he killed her, he’s [sic] then calling her a fucking bitch.
BRZEZINSKI: OK, Joe! Wow.
SCARBOROUGH: That’s what he said!
BRZEZINSKI: I know.
SCARBOROUGH: After he murdered—after he—
I take that back—after he "killed" her. After he killed her, that’s what he called her.
BRZEZINSKI: That’s true.
So said Joe and Mika. You can see the videotape as part of this report by Mediaite.
Two quick corrections / clarifications:
We'd score Joe's initial use of the term "murdered" as a possible deliberate mistake. He knows that "murdered" is a legal term. No one has been charged with murder at this point, let alone convicted.
By standard journalistic norms, he should have said "killed" and left it at that. Presumably, that's why he took his original comment back.
Also this:
As far as we know, no one has established that it was actually Ross who uttered the classic two-pronged insult. It could have been Ross, of course. Or it could have been one of the other ICE officers who had been gathered around Good's car.
That said, the classic insult was quickly delivered, a second or two after Good was fatally shot. Unless you read the New York Times, in which case you've apparently never seen the classic insult reported.
The background goes like this:
At 3:36 this morning, the Times published this updated version of a detailed report:
What We Know About the Fatal ICE Shooting in Minneapolis
The updated report includes an account of the comments which can be heard on the 47-second videotape. But once again, for whatever reason, the Times fails to mention the "fucking bitch" comment in this updated report.
Using the Times search engine earlier today, we were able to find no sign that the Times has ever reported the existence of that classic soul-draining remark.
As we noted in Saturday's report, the Washington Post did report the comment in question as part of a detailed report. This morning, Joe and Mika also reported the remark, with two possible journalistic errors sprinkled in.
We brunched with a lifelong friend on Sunday morning. Like many D.C.-area denizens, he and his wife cancelled their subscription to the Washington Post during one of the Jeff Bezos brouhahas.
His main subscription now is the Times. On Sunday morning, two days after the 47-second tape was released, he was still unaware of the "fucking bitch" remark.
There may be a defendable reason for what the Times has chosen to do. Also, there may not be! All in all, we're frequently puzzled by the "sanitizing" behavior the New York Times seems to perform in matters of this type.
(In its news reporting, we'd say that the Post tends to be much tougher. As we noted on Saturday, the Post gave major prominence the 47-second tape all day Saturday. As of 7 o'clock that morning, the Times seemed to have virtually disappeared the 47-second videotape—seemed to have removed its initial report on the tape from view on its major websites.
Was the ugly two-pronged insult ever delivered that day at all?
Times subscribers will say (and will think) one thing. Post subscribers, and Morning Joe viewers, are likely to think something different.
Some orgs have reported the comment. Other orgs have not. What's the reason for this divergence?
We don't have the slightest idea—and by prevailing rules of the game, no one will ever ask!
ReplyDelete"ut once again, for whatever reason, the Times fails to mention the "fucking bitch" comment in this updated report. "
So what? Why does it seem important or interesting to you, Bob?
Anyone -- yes, literally everyone, including you -- would've yelled "fucking bitch" if some bitch tried to run over you.
Seriously, Bob...
Funny how the limited slip differential stops the wheel from spinning when it got off the ice slab, how the murdering ICE slob kept walking in front and back of a running terrorists car with a nice doggy in the back, how the dumb fuck ICE Ross - so dumb he already put himself in a position to get drug down the street, like the stupid little bitch he is, ends up reaching for his gun while the car is in reverse and the wheel is being cranked away from him. Nazi cultists.
ReplyDelete"As far as we know, no one has established that it was actually Ross who uttered the classic two-pronged insult. It could have been Ross, of course. Or it could have been one of the other ICE officers who had been gathered around Good's car."
ReplyDeleteSince the video was taken from Ross's phone, one would assume that it was he who said it.
But so what. After all, he said it after she struck him with her vehicle which is now undisputed and after he shot three times and the vehicle was still driving away.
Depending on how he standing when he fired, perhaps Ross didn't even know that he had hit Goode.
'Depending on how he standing when he fired, perhaps Ross didn't even know that he had hit Goode."
DeleteIf the vehicle was close enough to bump Ross as he was shooting at its driver, the odds would be pretty high that he would have significantly harmed, if not killed her.
"after he shot three times and the vehicle was still driving away."
Are we to think that when a driver has been shot dead, the vehicle magically stops?
"he said it after she struck him with her vehicle"
'bumped' is more accurate than 'struck'. 'bumped after he stupidly remained in its path' is even more accurate.
But so what. After all, he said it after she struck him with her vehicle which is now undisputed and after he shot three times and the vehicle was still driving away.
DeleteShe struck him? And he bounced off and fell to the ground while firing the shots. No. She brushed against -- more likely he bumped into her vehicle -- with no harm to him. But keep on gaslighting how he feared for his and others safety. I forget: what was the medical report on the extent of Ross' injuries?
The jerky movement of the video he took is the only suggestion of contact between the fascist clown who murdered her and her vehicle. And that is not evidence at all since he was with the phone in one hand and gun in the other. While he was about to shot her in the head, his phone was not being used to video the event.
DeleteGood did not hit him with her vehicle, we can all see the videos.
DeleteThese lies from Republicans just come across as desperation.
From Ross' phone video it appears Ross actually put his hand on her hood to steady himself as he fired.
If the case goes to trial in MN, the likely outcome is Ross will be convicted - the videos are uncontroversial, Ross was the aggressor, broke protocol, and shot Good out of rage. Republicans will feign outrage but they won't really care, they will quickly move on to the next faux panic.
There's more than enough in the videos and eyewitnesses to sustain an indictment on state charges.
DeleteThere may be some jurisdictional issues with MN charging him, but they are not insurmountable.
Delete"Some orgs have reported the comment. Other orgs have not. What's the reason for this divergence?"
ReplyDeleteAn obvious guess would be that the publication avoids printing profanities. Another would be (as Our Host notes) we can't see who on the video utters the insult, so it can't be attributed.
Even so, I'd argue that the report could still include the fact that a profane insult was captured on the agent's phone recording.
One of the agents, surrounding Good's car, uttered "fucking bitch" -- so, it's entirely possible to attribute the remark, even if not precisely. It's an important element of the story, not a minor omission.
DeleteYou're both right, of course. What I'm haunted by, and what nobody seems to want to discuss, is why Renee Good would say, "That's fine, I'm not mad at you."
DeleteLove ya Quacker, but "avoids printing profanities" is not a a reason. F-bomb or similar references for dainty fucks can be used
DeleteDG: Good's remark seems to lack context, although I am sure it exists. I assume there was some exchange between them earlier. To me it only matters slightly as far as demonstrating her state of mind. Likewise, if it was Ross -- and it probably was -- who called her a fucking bitch, it would also demonstrate his state of mind.
Delete"To me it only matters slightly as far as demonstrating her state of mind."
DeleteReally? To me it's evidence that she was not trying to run him over out of anger. And you're right, it implies an earlier confrontation, which might explain why Ross was so angry.
But for some reason, these possibilities seem undiscused.
@5:13 I'm not at all familiar with the NYT style guide and I have no idea whether my guess is correct. But it is an obvious guess.
DeleteWhile I understand your perspective, the significance of Good saying 'I'm not mad at you' has been widely discussed. It reflects both her attempt to de-escalate the situation while resisting Ross's authoritarianism.
DeleteAs tensions rise and Ross circles her vehicle, it’s clear that he’s losing control, painting a picture more akin to Jack Torrance from The Shining. Ross likely saw this as a power struggle, with his amygdala overshadowing rational thought. This psychological tension was of his own making, while Good stood firm in her rights but became fearful as Ross increased his aggression.
With the rise of recordings in these interactions - thanks to the democratization of media - it’s unlikely Ross can convincingly argue he felt an imminent threat. This has been examined extensively, particularly in independent media, so if you feel this point has been overlooked, consider expanding your sources of information for a more nuanced view.
"it implies an earlier confrontation, which might explain why Ross was so angry"
DeleteMore directly, it seems to say something about Ross' demeanor as he circles her car, filming her. We can't see his face but he's apparently already pissed off and she's trying to calm him down.
Furthermore, him walking around the car demonstrated just unconcerned he was. Context is everything here.
DeleteWell said, 6:37.
DeleteThere was no "earlier confrontation". There are videos from witnesses that show the whole event.
ICE agents were active on that block prompting a handful (~5) of protestors, who were blowing whistles in protest.
Good came along and parked, her wife got out, and then Good pulled out, but stopped short and starting honking her horn in solidarity with the protestors. At that time all the ICE vehicles were parked, apparently they were then motivated to leave by the fairly meager and mild protest.
Where Good stopped and honked, she was not blocking the road, multiple cars passed by her including ICE vehicles. Then Ross's vehicle forcefully swung behind Good's vehicle and parked on her right flank, and an ICE truck stopped on her left flank.
It was the ICE vehicles that then were blocking the road as they had decided to make an example out of Good.
With Good flanked, Ross got out of his vehicle and their entire and sole interaction is caught by Ross's phone.
Good tried to calm the agents, but they weren't having it, one tried to open her door (with no legal authority) while another one circled to the front of her vehicle, breaking protocol.
Good understandably become alarmed and decided to leave, but Ross was blocking her so she reversed to move around him. As Good was reversing, Ross pulled his gun - he had already prepared to pull his gun a moment earlier as he positioned himself to block her vehicle, he moved his phone to his non dominant hand, freeing up his right hand to pull out his gun. He then shot her dead with no provocation, just from anger.
Bob does not like protest, authoritarians like ICE agents are provoked by their dominance being challenged, but Bob can go and try to defend his position to our Founding Fathers, abolitionists, Nazi fighters, Ghandi, and MLK jr but they would all laugh in his face - apparently Bob might prefer to live under a monarchy or dictatorship, free of Jews, and have slaves do all the work.
Where is the additional video going farther back?
DeleteLikewise, I cancelled my subscription to he WaPo, and subscribed to the NY Times. I am also noticing how the Times, sometimes ever so subtly and sometimes less so, sanitizes and sane-washes Trump and this administration. Omitting the "fucking bitch" curse is not a minor detail, as it goes a long way towards contextualizing ICE's hostility.
ReplyDeleteI am sure Scarborough was deliberate in describing Good's homicide as a murder. Was Noem and others in the administration deliberate in describing her as a domestic terrorist? Perhaps, not, as falsely accusing people of crime is their default position.
Why does Somerby have no sense of outrage?
ReplyDeleteHe's a Nazi too? Crazy to me anyone defends this murder/ downplays it. But we've always been at was with eastasia.
DeleteOr Eurasia. Or Eurelatives.
DeleteSomerby is out of touch.
DeleteSomerby does display outrage of his irrelevancy, it is part of why he expresses so much bitterness towards whatever he thinks "Blue America" is, but it is a feedback loop - as Somerby spews his bitterness, he relegates himself to irrelevancy even more.
I've never detected any bitterness in Somerby. Lamentations maybe. But not bitterness.
DeleteI am overwhelmed by all the spin. E.g. Both of these are correct
ReplyDelete1. After shooting her, the agent screamed FB
2. After she ran her car into his hip, the agent screamed FB
You're a fucking liar, Dickhead, you will always be a fucking liar.
DeleteWhy does Somerby allow you to come here and piss your fucking lies on his comment board every day, I don't understand.
You left out:
Delete3. After she turned her steering wheel to avoid hitting him and her car bumped him, he shot her to death and called her a fucking bitch.
Ran her car into his hip...that's what you saw in the video?
DeleteWhat does the medical report say about his injuries? Broken femur? Tibia? You should be overwhelmed by your own spin, David.
Good's vehicle did not bump into Ross.
DeleteFrom the videos, possibly Ross put his left hand holding the phone on the hood of Good's vehicle.
David is lying, per usual.
Anon@6:40 -- It sure defies credulity to say that her vehicle "ran into him", as he didn't even lose his balance; otherwise, he wouldn't have been able to demonstrate his bravery and marksmanship by shooting an unarmed woman in the face from two feet aware.
Delete"The death of truth is the ultimate victory of evil"
DeleteAndor, Season 3, Mon Mothma's speech
I dig that.
DeleteThe Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.
Delete… and DiC is with the Party.
Ilya, that debate is more complex via the Minnesota Police Accountability Act, which Gov. Walz signed in 2020:
Delete“Under Minnesota law (M.S. 609.066), officers can use deadly force if they reasonably believe it's necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm, and in the context of a vehicle, an officer can use deadly force if a vehicle is accelerating toward them, creating an immediate, life-threatening danger, even if the officer isn't directly in the path yet, though the threat must be specific, imminent, and require immediate action. This recent focus comes from a 2020 law signed by Gov. Tim Walz (the "Accountability Act") which established stricter standards for deadly force, requiring the threat to be specific and unavoidable without immediate deadly force, and this is being tested in recent high-profile incidents.
Key Aspects of Minnesota's Law:
Totality of Circumstances: The justification for deadly force is based on what an officer reasonably believes at the moment, not with hindsight.
Specific Threat: The threat must be articulable and imminent, meaning it's reasonably likely to occur without the officer's intervention.
No Unreasonable Delay: The situation must require deadly force immediately, with no reasonable alternative to stop the threat.
Vehicles as Weapons: A vehicle accelerating towards an officer can be considered a deadly weapon, justifying force if the officer reasonably fears death or great bodily harm.
The "Accountability Act" (2020):
This law reformed Minnesota's deadly force standard, moving beyond general reasonableness to a three-part test, emphasizing that officers must articulate the specific threat and show it's unavoidable without deadly force, a standard recently tested by high-profile shootings involving ICE agents.
In Summary: An officer can shoot if a car is accelerating towards them because it presents an imminent threat of death or great bodily harm, but this must meet the strict "Accountability Act" criteria of being specific, imminent, and requiring immediate deadly force.”
I agree with Cecelia, with these stricter standards it is even more unlikely Ross can credibly demonstrate that he reasonably felt an imminent threat. It is unclear if this applies to Ross, as a federal agent, but if so, this makes a conviction all the more likely.
DeleteAnonymouse 8:23pm, we shall see. The law makes it clear that a vehicle does not have to be directly pointed (right in the middle) of an officer for deadly force to be justified as self defense.
DeleteRoss is the same idiot who got into a position to be drug 100 feet and get 26 stitches. Great footwork pal. Now the moron is so scared of that sweet little doggy in that terrorist dyke car that he circles it with the other nimrods in front and in back!. Only time that tire spun was differential while on ice. Only time steering wheel spun was away from officer idiot footwork Ross. Jesus you fucking idiots (almost) never see the light, and when you do its ten years too late (Iraq invasion nimrods). Get help.
DeleteRoss is the same idiot who got into a position to be drug 100 feet and get 26 stitches. Great footwork pal. Now the moron is so scared of that sweet little doggy in that terrorist dyke car that he circles it with the other nimrods in front and in back!. Only time that tire spun was differential while on ice. Only time steering wheel spun was away from officer idiot footwork Ross. Jesus you fucking idiots (almost) never see the light, and when you do its ten years too late (Iraq invasion nimrods). Get help.
DeleteCecelia the troll. Stay away.
DeleteAnonymouse 8:36pm, police claim to have negative encounters with people throughout the year. Especially with crowd control during political unrest.I’ve never had a nasty encounter with a cop. I think they must be lying.
DeleteIt was murder.
DeleteI do not find Bob's story about his friend being aware of Bezos shenanigans enough to drop his subscription but not aware of the "fucking bitch" comment, to be credible.
ReplyDeleteIt is possible, but not probable.
Bob's purpose today is to cast doubt on if Ross said "fucking bitch", which Ross did, considering the quality of audio and that it was recorded by his phone in his hand (you can hear other people through his phone, and the quality of their audio is very different from the quality of Ross's audio).
Bob castigates Times for not reporting the comment. No one doubts that Ross said those words.
DeleteBob is slick, sly, and coy; you can not take his word at face value.
DeleteI agree, what Bob is doing today is trying to raise doubts, to muddy the water - his critique of the NY Times is just a way to mask his real agenda.
"someone present at the scene had made the remark"
Delete"no one has established that it was actually Ross ... It could have been Ross, of course. Or it could have been one of the other ICE officers"
If you read Somerby long enough, his weaselly phrasing becomes obvious.
Since it was the idiot Ross' phone, my money is the muttering murderer is Ross, but if it is another ICE POS fuck all y'all anyway.
DeleteAnonymouse 8:13pm, how many witnesses have verified that Ross said it? It’s likely that Ross did, but in what way has it actually been verified yet?
DeleteTroll fuck off. Go away.
DeleteRenee Good would have been a witness but Ross shot her.
DeleteAnonymouse 8:41pm, therefore there are no reliable witnesses?
DeleteSomething interesting is going on: if you watch all the videos, and then go to right wing channels on Youtube, they are playing altered videos, and you can tell because you can see the original ones from news sources.
ReplyDeleteWhen right wingers isolate themselves off from the normal world, they do themselves a disservice.
They somehow become even creepier Nazis one might say. All we owe, we owe to him. We have always been at war with eastasia.
Delete