← The Daily Beans
The Daily Beans
The Breakdown | Trump’s ICE Narrative CRATERS as TRANSCRIPTS EXPOSE HIM
00:25:58
Law enforcement transcripts prove Jonathan Ross was not seriously injured, and that Renee Good had a pulse when EMS arrived. Plus, the investigation into Walz and Frey is pretext to invoke the Insurrection Act.
Loading summary
Transcript41 lines
- [00:00]
A
It's Sunday morning and that wonderfully relaxed feeling of a long, lazy day lingers in the air. If you want to make the moment last, may I suggest the perfect solution, the Martin Sheen Podcast. Join me, your host, Martin Sheen, for beautifully crafted 20 minute programs filled with never before heard stories of my life, along with personal reflections and poetry that inspires. The Martin Sheen Podcast is the perfect Sunday refresh. A chance to take a deep breath, relax and know that the stress of Monday may be just around the corner, but not here, not now. So make this your weekly moment of calm as we explore faith, hope, love and what it means to be human. And know this, this journey is ever unfolding as I invite you to see what's next with me, Martin Sheen. And thank you.
- [00:57]
B
Hey everybody. It is Sunday, January 18, 2026. I'm Allison Gill and we now have evidence in the form of law enforcement dispatch transcripts from law enforcement in EMS that the ICE thug and murderer Jonathan Ross was not injured. We knew this, but now we have confirmation he did not go to the hospital from the scene and there's absolutely no evidence there there was any treatment of Ross by emergency medical services on the scene. So if you think you've been run over or have internal bleeding, you don't refuse aid from ems. Now, of course, like I said, we all suspected that the claims that Ross was injured were all lies. Because first of all, everything DHS says are provable lies on the ground. When there's an incident and they come out with a statement, it just takes a little while for video evidence and other evidence and witness evidence to disprove everything that DHS says about what happens on the ground. But now we have evidence from law enforcement confirming it. Not bystanders, not me, not people on the Internet. This new evidence also undercuts CBS News's unconfirmed and very sloppy reporting that Jonathan Ross suffered from internal bleeding because two anonymous Trump officials were told by someone else and they said so, though I doubt they'll retract their lies despite clear evidence that Ross was not injured as Renee Nicole Good peacefully tried to leave the scene before she was murdered. So I'm going to go over that police evidence that Jonathan Good wasn't injured, plus the looming threat of Trump invoking the Insurrection act. Possibly he's been threatening it for a long time now and now he may invoke it in Minneapolis. All of that on today's episode of the Breakdown. Hey everybody, like I said, I'm Alison Gill. Welcome to the Breakdown. Thanks. Thanks to Midas for for hosting my show here on their network. The New York Times, the Guardian, and a few other media outlets got a hold of the 911 and law enforcement transcripts from the day January 7th when Renee Nicole Goode was murdered. And now, as I said, we have documented confirmation from the cops that Jonathan Ross, the ICE agent who murdered Renee Nicole Good, was not seriously injured and did not go to the hospital or seek medical attention, despite CBS News now run by Barry Weiss, which has seen, by the way, a dramatic fall in ratings, especially for their evening news blog. We have CBS saying that he had suffered internal bleeding according to, like, double or triple hearsay from internal Trump administration government officials. I mean, we all knew that because we saw it with our own eyes. But like I said, now we have dispatch transcripts that prove Jonathan Ross was on the scene until 10:04am that's about 30 minutes after he murdered Renee Goode. And we also know that he wasn't seen by EMS on the scene, nor was he taken to the hospital, as Kristi Noem claimed in multiple press conferences the day of and the day after. And as Trump claimed on Truth Social when he posted that the officer had been run over and was clinging to life in the hospital. No. According to dispatch transcripts, quote, agent that fired is no longer on the scene and has been transported to to federal building. He was not taken to the hospital. Now, they claim here that that was 15 minutes after the shooting. But 911 calls show that the shooting took place a couple of minutes before 9:38am local time. They even say so in their own article. So I'm not sure why they think 9:35 or so to 1004 is 15 minutes. But I digress. The Times says, quote, the calls to 911 began at 9:38am on January 7, shortly after an Immigration and Customs and Enforcement officer fired a gun into Ms. Good's maroon Honda Pilot as observers and protesters confronted federal agents. The frantic calls persisted for about an hour. And the 911 calls also confirm what we saw with our own eyes on the video. Quote, There's 15 ICE agents and they shot her, like, because she wouldn't open her car door. One caller said, quote, I witnessed it. A separate caller told an operator asked if anyone was hit. She replied, after catching her breath, yes, bleeding. The caller later said she tried to drive away but crashed into the nearest vehicle that was parked. But here's the really horrible part from these transcripts. Quote, when paramedics arrived at 9:42am Ms. Good was in the driver's seat, unresponsive, with blood on her face and torso. The records say after they removed her from the vehicle, she was not breathing and had an irregular pulse. She had a pulse? It was thready and weak, but she had one. And I seem to remember a civilian physician minutes earlier on the scene asking to render aid and being told no.
- [06:37]
C
Can I go check a pole?
- [06:39]
D
No, back up now.
- [06:41]
C
I'm a physician.
- [06:42]
D
I don't care.
- [06:43]
B
Understand?
- [06:43]
D
We got EMS coming and.
- [06:44]
E
I get it.
- [06:45]
D
Just give us a second. We have medics on scene. We have our own medics.
- [06:50]
C
Where are they? Where are they?
- [06:53]
F
Relax.
- [06:53]
C
How can I relax? You just killed my neighbor. We caught your butter in the face. You killed my neighbor. How do you show up to work every day? How the do you do this every day? You're killing my neighbors. You're stealing my neighbors. What the man.
- [07:12]
B
Now, I don't know whether letting that physician in to start CPR minutes earlier would have made a difference, but we know minutes count in situations like that. And now we'll never know. The EMS dispatch records say that she had two gunshot wounds to the right chest and one in the forearm and perhaps one in the head. Now, if she was shot in the head, perhaps through her forearm, because I think there were only three shots, but again, I don't know. But if they shot her in the head, that might have been the fatal shot. And according to to ems, the possible gunshot to her head was on the left side of her head, not the front. Which tells me Jonathan Ross was at the side of her car aiming perpendicular to her head when he fired that shot. But investigators would need the ballistics evidence to prove that. But as we know, the FBI is covering up for this piece of shit and refusing to share evidence they collected at the scene. While with Minnesota prosecutors, they don't have the ballistics. Now, here's what the guardian says about the gunshot wounds. Quote, according to the report, paramedics identified two apparent gunshot wounds to the right side of her chest, another apparent gunshot wound to the patient's left forearm, and a possible gunshot wound with protruding tissue on the left side of the patient's head. The report also notes that she had dilated pupils and blood discharging from her left ear. So if she had two gunshot wounds in the right side of her chest, those bullets could have been the first two. And then the one on the left side of her head. Perhaps she put up her left arm that with the. The gun shot that went through maybe through her left arm and into the left side of her head would have been directly on from the side of the car. But there's nothing in this report or the transcripts about Jonathan Ross getting checked by EMS when they arrived on the scene. It seems to me if you think you've been injured, first of all, you don't say fucking bitch under your breath after you murder someone. But if you are there and EMS is there and you feel that you've been run over by a car or that you might have internal bleeding, you would have EMS check you out. And if there was a possibility you were bleeding internally, a life threatening emergency, you would be immediately transported to the hospital. But he wasn't. He didn't get checked out by ems. I don't know if he denied being seen by ems. Usually you have to do that. If you've ever been on a scene with EMS and they want to check you out and you don't want them to, you have to vehemently deny it. You have to opt out of that. There's nothing in these transcripts about that. I'm wondering why, but dude hung around for almost 30 minutes and then was taken to the federal Building. And again, not according to a bystander or Rachel Maddow or me, but according to the cops and radio chatter. And the Whipple Federal Building is about a 15 to 20 minute drive from the murder scene. You can check it on Google Maps, 34th street and Portland Avenue to the Whipple Federal building is about 7 miles, 6 or 8 miles depending on which route you take. Now. Despite the protests in, in Minneapolis, the peaceful protests, Trump has not yet invoked the Insurrection act, but not for not trying. ICE is desperate to provoke a Reichstag fire moment on the ground. They're deploying flashbangs and tear gas and terrorizing innocent people in hopes that someone, just one person, responds in a way that justifies invoking the Insurrection act so he can deploy the military in the city. There are multitudes of stories on the ground in the Twin Cities of ICE terrorizing the citizens, and they haven't. It's of note that he hasn't invoked the Insurrection act based on what's already transpired because he knows there's not an argument, he knows it's them, that they are causing the violence here. The people are the victims, not the perpetrators. The Times reports, quote, a Minneapolis couple said that ICE agents deployed tear gas and stun grenades around them and their six children, the youngest only six months old, as they tried to maneuver their car out of a tense protest on Wednesday night. Sean Jackson and his wife Destiny, both 26, said they were driving home from a son's basketball game when the family found themselves caught in a clash when between protesters and federal agents in north Minneapolis. Quote, the crowd control grenades went off around them and one tear gas canister rolled beneath the car. Ms. Jackson said a concussive blast from the tear gas canister, or a different device she wasn't sure, rocked the vehicle, setting off the airbags and trapping the family as acrid smoke billowed around them. Quote, it felt like our lungs were burning, Ms. Jackson said, noting that two of his children no, excuse me, Mr. Jackson said, noting that two of his children had severe asthma. Water didn't help. Nothing helped. Now Homeland Security posted on Twitter right after the aftermath of that it's horrific to see radical agitators bring children to violent riots. Please stop endangering your children now. They quickly deleted that post when they realized they almost murdered a six month old child who had stopped breathing and had to be rushed to the hospital. They are recovering now. There are so many people in fact being dragged out of their vehicles and wrongfully detained that the city has put out a statement saying vehicles that are abandoned due to an ICE detention and towed to the city's impound lot were will be released to their owners or representative at no cost. There are so many vehicles being abandoned in Minnesota right now, in Minneapolis right now from ICE detentions, it's such a big problem that they had to put out a statement about it and promise that they would release the vehicle to you at no charge. It's that big of a problem. So with all this going on, why hasn't Trump invoked the Insurrection act yet? Well, I think he might be about to, but not because of what DHS claims happened to Jonathan Ross. You know, as much as they're trying to make this about her ramming him when he's moving his vehicle out of the snow, every bullshit statement they're making, trying to make it seem like an officer was attacked, they know the truth.
- [14:04]
F
Right?
- [14:05]
B
And they don't want to use that as the legal vehicle to argue this to the Supreme Court or any court. Because guess what? They would have to bring the evidence. They would be forced to put the evidence that they are trying to hide about the murder out into the open in open court. So I don't think that. I don't think they're going to use that as their Reichstag fire. Right? It's a bad legal vehicle to argue for deploying the military. No, I think they're going to try to argue that local and state officials are impeding their operations. And I base that opinion on, on something the Department of Justice announced just on Friday, two days ago, you'll recall that here on the breakdown on November 2, I speculated that the Supreme Court might deny Trump the ability to deploy the national guard under Title 10 of the United States Code Section 12406 watch.
- [15:01]
G
But now let's talk about the Illinois case on the National Guard in Chicago. A lower court there issued a restraining order to not Deploy. And the 7th Circuit there, they upheld that lower court order. So there's no need for an en banc rehearing. But the Trump administration appealed to the Supreme Court. That was about 17 days ago. And this week, the Supremes issued an.
- [15:22]
B
Order that tells me they might actually.
- [15:24]
G
Rule against Trump on this one, on his authority under 10 US code 12406 section 12406. That's the authority he's currently trying to use.
- [15:40]
B
And this order makes me think that.
- [15:41]
G
The Supreme Court.
- [15:44]
B
Will rule that he.
- [15:45]
G
Doesn'T have the authority, this authority under that particular law. Here's the order from the justices I'm talking about. It says the parties are directed to file supplemental letter briefs addressing the following question, whether the term regular forces refers to the regular forces of the United States military, and if so, how that interpretation affects the operation of Title 10, U.S. code Section 12406. So 10 U.S. code Section 12106 is.
- [16:14]
B
The law, like I said, that Trump.
- [16:16]
G
Says gives him the authority to deploy the National Guard. It says the National Guard can be.
- [16:21]
B
Deployed when the president is unable with the regular forces to execute the laws.
- [16:27]
G
Of the United States. Now, the Trump administration says that the.
- [16:32]
B
Local federal cops in Chicago.
- [16:37]
G
Are regular forces and that they can't control the crime by themselves. So he thinks regular forces means civilian law enforcement, not the military. Now, Illinois and a guy named Marty Lederman, who's who's filed an amicus brief in this case, argues that the regular forces are the military. And since Trump hasn't deployed the military, he hasn't met the requirements of the.
- [17:04]
B
Law.
- [17:06]
G
That says POTUS can send the National Guard when regular forces fail. You can only send the National Guard if the military. If regular forces are the military, you can only send the National Guard if the military has failed. He never sent the military, so you can't send the National Guard. So the Supreme Court here wants the parties to define regular forces, and it.
- [17:26]
B
Gives them until November 17th to do.
- [17:28]
G
So, meaning the National Guard will remain blocked from being deployed in Chicago until.
- [17:32]
B
At least November 17th. But it seems obvious to me that.
- [17:36]
G
Trump is trying to get permission to deploy the military under this law. 12406 but if he fails, if the Supreme Court says no, I imagine Trump will take a look at invoking the Insurrection Act.
- [17:50]
B
Now, as it turns out, I was right. The Supreme Court ruled against Trump and blocked him from deploying the National Guard under that title. 12406 and Kavanaugh, Justice Kavanaugh, in his concurrence, said he was concerned that this might lead to an invocation of the Insurrection Act. He writes in a footnote in his concurrence, quote, as I read it, the court's opinion does not address the president's authority under the Insurrection Act. One apparent ramification of the Court's opinion is that it could cause the president to, to use the US Military more than the National Guard to protect federal personnel and property in the United States. So this past Thursday, I spoke to an expert, Steve Vladek on Substack Live, about one of the provisions in the Insurrection Act, a real murky one that Trump and Miller may try to take advantage of in Minneapolis. Watch.
- [18:49]
F
Yeah, and I think, you know, the problem with 12406 was that, as I said, the Supreme Court asked them to define regular forces. And as Marty Lederman pointed out in his amicus brief, regular forces is the military. And so the president can't deploy National Guard unless the regular forces fail, which is the military. And since that hadn't happened, you can't deploy. But in the Insurrection act, it seems like especially that final provision is a little more problematic for us, not for Trump, because it's to put down any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination of conspiracy if it part two, opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws. And what does that even mean? And how would this Supreme Court interpret that? So talk a little bit about that final provision being a little bit jinky.
- [19:42]
E
So jinky's a good word for it. I mean, I think part of it was, you know, when Congress first passed these laws in the 1790s, it was couldn't really define with specificity all of the emergencies that might arise. And so it really, it is a broad delegation, but it's worth stressing. I mean, and I mentioned this in some of my writing, the Justice Department has long taken the position that even that language still requires a fundamental breakdown in order. And, you know, the problem is, is that if you read that language literally and out of context, you know, a single private citizen who parks their SUV in front of the garage that the ICE officers are driving their vehicles out of is, you know, maybe impeding. Right. The ability of federal law enforcement officers. No one would ever have thought that that was sufficient to justify an invocation of the Insurrection Act. And so we have here, I think, a bit of a disconnect between what the statute says in a vacuum and how it's always been understood, and it's always been understood to require much, much more to the point of either local authorities who are overwhelmed or local authorities who are themselves the ones who are doing the obstructing.
- [20:55]
B
So he doesn't have authority under 12406. Kavanaugh is worried that that might cause him to invoke the Insurrection Act. He needs pretext to invoke the Insurrection act, such as local authorities impeding law enforcement. And then the very next day, what do you know? We learned that his Department of Justice is criminally investigating Minnesota Governor Tim Walz and Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Fry for what, quote, the Justice Department has issued subpoenas for Governor Tim Walls and Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Fry as part of an investigation, alleging that the two Democratic leaders are impeding federal law enforcement officers abilities to do their jobs in the state. They're investigating them for language directly out of the Insurrection Act. Look, the president can deploy the military under the Insurrection act if, quote, authorities of that state oppose or obstruct the execution of the laws of the United States, it is right out of the Insurrection Act. The investigation into Walls and Fry isn't just a dick move to go after his political enemies. It's that. But it's also, I think, a pretext to invoke the Insurrection act, which, again, they haven't done based on the murder of Renee Nicole Goode, because they know they murdered her. And they would have to show their evidence in open court. And again, they are trying to hide that evidence. But remember, it was Kavanaugh that warned that blocking Trump deploying the National Guard could lead to an invocation of the Insurrection Act. And he is the administrative justice that sits atop the eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, and Minneapolis is in the eighth Circuit. So if, if Trump invokes the Insurrection act and someone gets a temporary restraining order in a lower court or a preliminary injunction and the appeals court upholds that block and Trump appeals to the Supreme Court, Kavanaugh would be could be the one deciding factor about whether or not to issue an administrative temporary stay on that lower court order. But would the appeals court uphold a lower court injunction barring the use of the Insurrection Act. Would the appeals court agree to that? Minneapolis, as I said, is part of the 8th Circuit, which is a very conservative circuit. Ten of the 11 judges on the 8th Circuit bench were appointed by Republicans, including four by Trump himself. So I think we're actually about to find out how the 8th Circuit feels about a lot of this, because U.S. district Judge Catherine Menendez, a Biden appointee, just issued the following preliminary injunction. Covered federal agents are hereby enjoined from a. Retaliating against persons who are engaging in peaceful and unobstructive protest activity, including observing the activities of of Operation Metro Surge. B. Arresting or detaining persons who are engaging in peaceful and unobstructive protest activity, including observing the activities of Operation Metro Surge in retaliation for their protected conduct and absent a showing of probable cause or reasonable suspicion that the person has committed a crime or is obstructing or interfering with the activities of covered federal officers. C. Using pepper spray or similar non lethal munitions and crowd dispersal tools against persons who are engaging in peaceful and unobstructive protest activity, including observing the activities of Operation Metro Surge in retaliation for their protected conduct. D. Stopping or detaining drivers and passengers in vehicles where there is no reasonable articulable suspicion that they are forcibly obstructing or interfering with covered federal agents or otherwise violating U.S. code Title 18, U.S. code Section 111 the act of safely following covered federal agents at an appropriate distance does not by itself create reasonable suspicion to justify a vehicle stop. Now, it's a foregone conclusion that the government will appeal this preliminary injunction to the 8th Circuit. And we'll see, probably sooner rather than later, how the conservative 8th Circuit responds. Now, before we go, I just want to leave you with this clip. Stay inside, lock your doors. They're here. It's just terrifying. We love you, Minneapolis. Stay strong and stay safe. We'll see you next week on the Breakdown.
- [26:37]
H
Love this video. Support independent media and unlock exclusive content ad free videos and custom emojis by becoming a paid member of our YouTube channel today. You can also gift memberships to others. Let's keep growing together.
- [26:55]
A
Sunday morning and that wonderfully relaxed feeling of a long, lazy day lingers in the air. If you want to make the moment last, may I suggest the perfect solution, the Martin Sheen Podcast. Join me, your host, Martin Sheen, for beautifully crafted 20 minute programs filled with never before heard stories of my life. Along with personal reflections and poetry that inspires, the Martin Sheen Podcast is the perfect Sunday refresh. A chance to take a deep breath, relax. And know that the stress of Monday may be just around the corner, but not here, not now. So make this your weekly moment of calm as we explore faith, hope, love, and what it means to be human. And know this. This journey is ever unfolding as I invite you to see what's next. With me, Martin Sheen. And thank you.