By John Q. Hosedrinker 
The Department of Justice confirmed that it would not investigate the fatal shooting of Renee Good by an ICE agent, despite the incident being recorded on multiple phones and occurring near the site of George Floyd’s murder. Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche stated that the publicly available video evidence cleared the officer and that the department does not investigate all incidents where officers defend themselves. This decision contrasts with the previous administration’s investigation of the George Floyd killing, which resulted in convictions. Critics have raised concerns due to the involvement of high-ranking officials sharing false claims and potentially impeding justice.
Read the original article here
The stark contrast between the Justice Department’s handling of the George Floyd case and the Renee Good killing immediately highlights a disturbing pattern. It’s difficult not to be struck by the apparent double standard. One case, involving the death of a Black man at the hands of law enforcement, drew immediate and intense scrutiny, leading to federal involvement. The other, the death of Renee Good, appears to be met with a distinct lack of interest, with the Justice Department seemingly content to let the matter drop. This disparity raises serious questions about the fairness and impartiality of the justice system, and whether political considerations, or the perceived allegiances of those involved, are influencing the allocation of resources and investigative efforts.
The situation surrounding the Renee Good killing is particularly troubling. The initial removal of the case from state jurisdiction, followed by a subsequent decision to drop the investigation entirely, creates an undeniable impression of obstruction. The phrase “we already investigated ourselves and found no wrongdoing” is particularly cynical, suggesting a lack of genuine commitment to uncovering the truth. The lack of federal action raises suspicions of corruption and the deliberate shielding of a federal agent, particularly when it appears that the State authorities are impeded in their efforts to uncover the truth. There’s a strong sentiment that this perceived inaction undermines public trust and feeds a sense that the powerful are shielded from accountability. The notion that the Justice Department acts as a “MAGA enforcement agency” is a damning accusation.
The fact that attention seems to be diverted elsewhere, even to investigating Renee Good’s spouse, appears deeply cynical to many. The lack of any apparent consequences for the officer involved, and a possible pattern of cover-ups, is an obvious sign of problems with the system. The expressed sentiment that “they are too busy making up cases against Powell and anyone else Trump gets a bug up his ass about” further suggests that the DoJ is politicized. The whole situation smacks of a selective application of justice, where the circumstances of the victim and the perceived political leanings of the officer influence the severity of the response. The suspicion is that if Renee Good was affiliated with a certain political faction or ideological viewpoint, the case might have received far more attention. The situation is considered to be symptomatic of a deeper rot within the system.
This inaction surrounding the Renee Good case also appears to be happening even after visual evidence of a transgression seems to be readily available. The reference to the officer’s alleged actions following the shooting, and the lack of any subsequent reprimand, paints a troubling picture. This reinforces the perception of a biased system. The comments highlight the impact on the family, who are denied justice and closure in the foreseeable future. The implication of “fascist government” hints at the potential for a situation where the Justice Department itself is weaponized and becomes a tool for political agendas.
The potential role of state authorities in taking over the investigation, given the federal government’s refusal to act, is seen as crucial. If the federal authorities are unwilling to conduct a proper investigation, the state must step in. The notion of civil lawsuits being filed and criminal charges under state laws brought forth is considered a way to pursue justice. The comments also show the concerns surrounding an administration that appears to prioritize political machinations over justice and public safety. This perception feeds into a widespread distrust of government and its institutions.
This sense of distrust extends to the idea that any government institution can operate in a fair and just manner. The assertion that “there is no such thing as a Justice Department” reflects a deep-seated cynicism about the state of the nation. It highlights a breakdown in public trust. It paints a picture of a nation where justice is denied. The concern that “Americans have the memory and intellectual grit of goldfish” reflects a concern about whether the public will remain interested in the case, particularly as the attention span of society wanes.