By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Responding to cell phone footage of a fatal shooting by a federal immigration agent, former FBI official Michael Feinberg criticized the agent’s actions and the use of deadly force. Feinberg stated that the video shows officers overreacting to “sarcastic” civilians. He highlighted that being heckled or videotaped is part of the job and does not justify the use of deadly force, citing the agent’s access to protective equipment. Feinberg also criticized comments made by politicians, and called out the unprofessionalism of the remark “fucking bitch” in the footage.
Read the original article here
Overreacting is a key term here, and it’s being used by a former FBI official to describe the actions of an ICE agent who fatally shot a woman in Minneapolis. Michael Feinberg, with his extensive background in law enforcement, isn’t mincing words; he believes the agent’s actions were disproportionate to the perceived threat, and the excuses being offered by the Trump administration are, as he puts it, “asinine.” The crux of his argument centers on the application of deadly force and whether the situation warranted such a response.
The core of Feinberg’s analysis is that the agent overreacted. Based on the available footage, including the agent’s own cell phone video, there was no justifiable reason for the use of lethal force. Feinberg’s professional judgment is that the agent should have maintained his composure and prioritized de-escalation rather than resorting to violence. He is essentially saying the agent failed to exercise the emotional maturity and restraint expected of law enforcement officers. The implication is that the agent let his emotions, perhaps fueled by a perceived lack of respect or defiance from the civilians, dictate his actions, ultimately leading to a tragic outcome.
One particularly damning aspect, according to Feinberg, is the agent’s decision to film the interaction with his cell phone. Why would an officer, who purportedly felt threatened for his life, be preoccupied with recording the encounter? This apparent contradiction raises serious questions about the agent’s mindset and intentions. It suggests a lack of genuine fear and casts doubt on the validity of any claim that deadly force was necessary for self-defense. The actions leading up to the shooting, from the verbal exchange to the agent’s positioning, seem to suggest a dangerous escalation.
Moreover, Feinberg explicitly criticizes both the President and other officials for commenting on the shooting before any proper investigation had taken place. This rushed commentary, in his view, undermines the integrity of the process and potentially signals a bias in favor of the agent. This is not just a matter of professional conduct; it also highlights a broader concern regarding accountability and the potential for a cover-up. The early defense of the agent, without awaiting a thorough examination of the facts, suggests a willingness to protect him at all costs, even if it meant disregarding the truth.
The specific “fucking bitch” comment heard in the clip is also a major point of contention. Feinberg doesn’t just dismiss it as a minor slip-up; he identifies it as a blatant example of unprofessionalism. This outburst, from a law enforcement officer on duty, underscores the lack of emotional control and judgment that should have been present. It reveals an emotional state that seems to have played a significant role in the events leading up to the shooting.
Feinberg further argues that the agent had numerous options to avoid the use of deadly force. These options would have included, at minimum, stepping out of the path of the vehicle. The fact that the agent remained in a position where he could be struck and then used that as justification to open fire suggests premeditation and a disregard for established protocols. By positioning himself in front of the car, the agent seems to have intentionally created a scenario in which he could justifiably use his weapon.
The official guidelines for the use of deadly force emphasize that it should only be employed as a last resort, when all other options have been exhausted. The existence of the video, and the sequence of events it depicts, strongly suggest the agent had alternatives, including simply moving out of the way of the vehicle. By choosing to use deadly force when other options were available, the agent arguably violated these guidelines and acted in a manner that was both reckless and unjustified.
In conclusion, Feinberg’s criticisms are rooted in his years of experience and his understanding of law enforcement protocols. His opinion that the agent overreacted and that the Trump administration is offering “asinine” excuses is powerful. His perspective challenges the narrative being presented and raises serious questions about the agent’s actions, the motives behind them, and the broader issue of accountability within law enforcement agencies. This is about more than just one shooting; it’s about the use of excessive force, the need for emotional maturity, and the importance of holding those in positions of power accountable for their actions.