By David Frum
Monday, January 12, 2026
More than Donald Trump, more than Department of Homeland
Security Secretary Kristi Noem, more than anyone in ICE’s leadership, J. D.
Vance has made himself the lead defender of the killing in Minnesota. Why?
The day after the shooting, Vance announced a new
administration effort to prosecute welfare fraud in Minnesota and elsewhere.
Vance’s message started hot
and got hotter. He blamed immigrants in general—and Somali immigrants in
particular—for cheating taxpayers and raising the cost of child care for
Americans. Then he launched into a denunciation of Renee Nicole Good, the woman
shot dead in Minneapolis. He accused her of intentionally attacking a federal
agent with her car. He alleged that she belonged to a broader network of
activists who plotted “to attack, to dox, to assault” federal law enforcement.
He blasted media outlets for covering her killer unsympathetically.
Vance’s words were not a spontaneous reaction to an
unexpected question. They were planned, the message he arrived to drive. He did
not wait for all of the facts. He did not bother with any notes of compassion
for the dead woman and her grieving family.
The vice president next took to X, first to promote a video
from the shooter’s point of view, then to mix it up with
a journalist about that video (“He is allowed to discharge his weapon in
self-defense”).
He did not have to do any of that. He could have
expressed support for law enforcement more generally. He did not have to malign
the victim. He did not have to champion the shooter. He did not have to insert
himself as the main character in a story that was still only just coming into
view.
That he did so may seem especially bold given the
political context. According to a poll taken the same day as the shooting in
Minneapolis, the
public has turned against ICE’s often-brutal methods. A majority of
Americans condemn ICE as “too forceful.” Vance began
his term as perhaps the least popular new vice president in the history of
polling. Identifying himself with ICE at its deadliest might seem a hazardous
move for such a disliked politician.
But there is a logic to Vance’s combative stance. Vance
clearly understood what ICE means to Trump’s base.
For MAGA America, ICE is an instrument for cleansing
violence. Visit ICE social-media accounts and you’ll see, again and again,
videos of armed force against unarmed individuals, against a soundtrack of
pumping music. There’s a
montage of aggressive arrests in Minnesota of unarmed, nonwhite men, many
of them thrown to the ground and cuffed, set to the 1977 hit “Cold as Ice”:
“Someday you’ll pay the price.” A dozen heavily armed and armored agents
round up
a single unarmed woman in a T-shirt and two similarly defenseless men in
California. In
Indiana, armored agents throw handcuffs and ankle chains on a big haul of
men and shove them in a cell, where they can be seen pacing, weeping, or with
their heads plunged in their hands.
Rarely do these videos present a situation that couldn’t
be managed with a couple of plainclothes officers bearing holstered sidearms.
The point is to prove that the fearsome power of the American state is being
wielded by righteous MAGA hands against despised MAGA targets.
On the afternoon of January 9, the DHS X account posted an image of a
lone cowboy riding through some Western landscape while a stealth bomber flies
overhead. Across the image are the words “We’ll have our home again.” You may
not recognize the phrase. It’s a lyric of a song that’s popular on
the nationalist far right:
In our own towns, we’re
foreigners now, our names are spat and cursed
The headlines smack of another attack, not the last, and not the worst
Oh my fathers they look down on me, I wonder what they feel
To see their noble sons driven down, beneath a coward’s heel
Oh by God we’ll have our home
again, by God we’ll have our home
By blood or sweat, we’ll get there yet, by God we’ll have our home
That is not a paean to law enforcement. MAGA Republicans
do not reliably care about laws or the people who enforce them. One of Trump’s
first actions upon entering office was to pardon more than 1,500 people charged
in connection with the
January 6, 2021, riot at the Capitol, including many convicted of violent
offenses against the police. He has denigrated the FBI and transformed the
agency into a tool of retribution, and he regularly disparages prosecutors and
law-enforcement officials if they fail to comply with his will.
The only law-enforcement agency the administration
consistently champions happens to have a particularly grim record of violent
overreactions. According
to The Trace, which tracks gun violence generally, Good was one of four
people who have been killed by ICE since the crackdown began in June, and the
organization has identified more than 30 incidents in which immigration agents
have either opened fire or held someone at gunpoint. Border Patrol agents have
also shot at least three people who were simply observing or documenting
immigration raids, including a 30-year-old American woman in Chicago, at whom
an agent shouted “Do something, bitch” before opening fire with an assault
rifle. She was hit five times but somehow survived.
This count doesn’t include the many reported incidents of
physical assaults without guns, such as choking and body slams,
including of elderly men
and women.
More and worse scenes have been recorded
in Minnesota this past weekend.
ICE is violence-prone in part because the agency
has lowered its training standards and ditched much of its
background vetting to meet the president’s grandiose deportation targets. But
more fundamentally, ICE is violence-prone because its main purpose has become
theatrical. Under present leadership, ICE is less a law-enforcement agency than
it is a content creator.
Americans want borders enforced. They want foreign
criminals apprehended and deported. They want unfounded asylum claimants to be
removed promptly. But most Americans don’t thrill to spectacular acts of
six-on-one violence aimed at DoorDash delivery men. ICE’s approval ratings have
duly
plummeted.
Again and again, ICE agents are encountering members
of the public who reject their protection and sympathize with the supposed
invaders. Yet ICE’s powers against U.S. citizens are
limited. Americans can record ICE operations, follow ICE motorcades, and
vex and annoy ICE personnel, and there’s not much that ICE or Border Patrol
agents can legally do to stop them—hence the turn to unlawful force instead.
That’s the mentality the whole world saw in videos of the
killing of Good in Minneapolis, including the one seemingly recorded by the
shooter himself. The ICE agent will likely argue that he opened fire on
Good—who was unarmed and driving away—to save his own life. But the videos also
raise the possibility that he fired because he felt disrespected by a person
who—in his opinion—owed him deference. ICE agents who use violence may be
counting on superiors to back them up, because they feel disrespected too, and
by the whole ungrateful country. Which returns us to Vance and his don’t
bother me with the facts defense of the ICE shooter.
MAGA is many things, but above all it’s a movement about
redistributing respect away from those who command too much (overeducated
coastal elites) to those who don’t have enough (white Americans without
advanced degrees who feel left behind). You see that redistribution at work in
the Trump administration’s project to devalue medical experts and empower
wellness gurus and vaccine
skeptics, and in its dismissal of “deep state” national-security
professionals in favor of TV
pundits.
Nowhere does the demand to redistribute respect come into
starker view than when guns start firing. In Trump’s first term, Kyle
Rittenhouse—who shot and killed two men and injured a third during protests
against police brutality in Wisconsin in August 2020—became a MAGA hero largely
because he was enforcing the MAGA vision of respect due. Many Americans saw him
as a trigger-happy 17-year-old vigilante, but to the MAGA faithful he was a
brave soldier in the larger war against MAGA enemies, real and imagined.
The ICE agent who killed Good is Trump’s second-term Kyle
Rittenhouse. Of course the agent could have walked away and left everyone
unharmed. By law, perhaps he should have walked away: It’s generally
illegal for a law-enforcement officer to kill a civilian seeking to escape,
more so if the civilian is unarmed, and even more so if the civilian is not a
criminal suspect of any kind. But letting protesters drive off unscathed,
without punishing them for their disrespect, would let them “get away with it.”
And that would be an intolerable affront to the MAGA vision of who must submit
to whom.
By coming so vociferously to the shooter’s defense, Vance
full-throatedly committed himself to the MAGA mission of enforcing respect by
any means necessary. Because there’s always such a strong
whiff of cynical calculation and inauthenticity about Vance, he has to say
more and go further than many natural MAGA personalities do. He has to pay
moral cash where others might be trusted on moral credit. If the Minneapolis
shooter is the next Kyle Rittenhouse, Vance dared not delay before thrusting
himself at this new MAGA hero’s side.
This is how we arrive at a moment when the country’s
highest-ranking officials are endorsing a lethal shooting on the basis of
claims refuted by the evidence. Failure to heed the MAGA campaign to
redistribute respect is insolence punishable by death.
No comments:
Post a Comment