Unmasking the Divide: Jake Lang vs. Renee Good – Two Faces of Activism in a Fractured America

Standard

The events unfolding in Minnesota this month highlight a stark contrast in how individuals engage with controversy and authority. On one side stands Jake Lang, the January 6 pardoned agitator who assaulted police officers with a baseball bat and shield during the Capitol riot. On the other is Renee Good, a 37-year-old mother of three, poet, and community member who was fatally shot by an ICE agent on January 7, 2026, amid the dramatically heightened Federal immigration enforcement operations in Minneapolis.

While I ultimately disagree with Renee Good’s methods along with life choices—confronting Federal agents in a way that escalated a tense situation—I see her as a misguided local mom standing up in her own community against what appeared to be an overreach by armed Federal officers. Reports describe her stopping her vehicle near an ICE operation after dropping her child at school, possibly to observe or support neighbors in a residential area. Federal accounts claim she attempted to use her car as a weapon, but the bystander videos, witness statements, and local and state officials have disputed this, calling the shooting unjustified and questioning whether the agent followed proper training and protocols. Good was killed during the encounter, sparking nationwide outrage, protests, vigils, and calls for accountability—though the DOJ has declined to investigate the agent.

Good’s death feels like a tragic escalation born from genuine concern over Federal actions in her neighborhood, even if her approach risked danger. She wasn’t traveling cross-country to provoke; she was in her own backyard, acting on what she saw as violations of rights—potentially the 4th and 5th Amendments amid warrantless stops and aggressive tactics.  And while I may not agree with her politics or lifestyle, she’s a citizen of the United States.

Contrast that with Jake Lang, who I believe actively harms conservative causes and civil discourse alike. Lang, pardoned for his role in January 6 violence, has a pattern of inserting himself into flashpoints to inflame divisions. He recently organized a very small “March Against Minnesota Fraud” rally near Minneapolis City Hall on January 17, 2026—framed around anti-immigration and anti-Somali messaging, including plans to burn a Quran. The event drew massive counter-protesters who outnumbered his group, chased him away, doused him with liquids in freezing weather, and left him bruised and claiming injury (including a reported stab wound). Photos show a Black protester lifting his plate carrier (foolishly worn without plates) amid the scuffle; rumors of him losing control in the moment circulated widely.

Lang’s stunts—Nazi salutes outside AIPAC, provocative bacon displays in Dearborn, and now this anti-Islam rally—seem calculated to exacerbate tensions. He poses as an Evangelical Christian white nationalist and “America First” voice, yet his actions ring as performative and divisive. Traveling thousands of miles simply to instigate, he turns peaceful concerns of citizens into opportunities for opponents to paint the entire right as extremist. This fascist agitation discredits legitimate criticism of policies (like immigration enforcement or foreign influence) by manufacturing associations with hate.

I’m really hoping that my conservative friends can distinguish between: a guy who helped turn a peaceful protest of alleged election fraud into an opportunity for Democrats to brand the entire Jan. 6 crowd as insurrectionists—who literally assaulted a police officer with a baseball bat, who should not have been pardoned, and who at least acts like a Nazi with his Sieg Heil salutes and who travels thousands of miles just to cause trouble;
and a misguided mom being active in her own community, standing up to what looks like an invasion of federal agents, and truly exposing what look like violations of the 4th and 5th Amendments.

Does this truly represent American conservatives?

Lang’s agitation fits a broader destabilization playbook: pitting factions against each other to deplete energy on all sides, fueling fear of Islam (if love for Israel can’t be won, hate for Muslims will do), and manufacturing “Nazi” strawmen to smear America First views. It distracts from real scandals—like Epstein-related corruption or DOJ transparency failures—while provoking chaos that benefits neither side.

Renee Good’s story, tragic as it is, stems from local concern gone wrong. Jake Lang’s thrives on manufactured conflict that poisons discourse. Conservatives should reject the latter and focus on principled, community-rooted engagement—not imported provocation. Let’s see through the agitators and reclaim civil, substantive debate before more divisions tear us apart.

The Bigger Deception

Good, agree with her or not, was probably what she appeared to be: A lesbian leftist who did not agree with Trump’s unprecedented immigration enforcement regime that is clearly violating the rights of US citizens by officers demanding they prove their legal status.  Civil disobedience has been a feature of American politics since at least the time of the Boston Tea Party.  She’s akin to the colonial Minutemen warning “the British coming” to those who wanted to protect their illegal stash of military arms.  The legendary Revolutionary “shot heard ’round the world” was fired against those impeding a policing operation who had refused to disperse—like the many Minneapolis residents including Good.

Jacob, by contrast, may shout “Christ is King” and say he is part of the America First movement, yet he probably represents a foreign regime.  Does a real Christian put a funny hat on their head and kiss a wall in Israel?

If he’s not a Psyop, then he sure acts the part.

Why is he kissing the wall?

What I mean by that is that intelligence agencies—like the CIA and Mossad—will run operations to sow seeds of discord.  In places like Ukraine (or Iran) they will stir protests, orchestrate terrorism and shoot police and protesters alike just to try to cause tensions to boil over.  There’s an excellent article in Foreign Policy magazine, “False Flag,” describing this underreported scheme to stoke hostilities between the US and Iran.  If you keep your enemies fighting each other rather than to finally notice who is actually driving the conflict—you gain by their loss.

If you don’t understand, here’s a personal story from my son’s elementary school days which illustrates how agitators operate:

One day, out of nowhere, my son got punched on the school bus. After he defended himself and punched back, the dust settled, and the truth emerged: a third kid had orchestrated the whole thing. This instigator had quietly lied to the attacker, claiming my son had said something insulting about him, deliberately provoking the fight while staying in the background as things unfolded.  Thankfully, the adults investigated quickly, saw through the manipulation, and punished the true originator—the actual bully who started it all—far more severely (three times as harshly, in fact) than the two boys who were drawn into the conflict not realizing they were being played against each other.

Things aren’t always as they appear.  I’ve run into those who think Lang is some kind of hero for his attention-seeking provocation.  They are typically Evangeli-con types too absorbed in the tit-for-tat of the culture war—or too obtuse to ever ask why Jerry Falwell Sr, a leader of the “Moral Majority,” was gifted a Lear jet by an Israeli Prime Minister in 1980.  The reality is that powerful players are manufacturing consent with characters like Lang or dozens of others taking the $7000 deal.  We’re being played.  Merchants of hate do not represent Christ or the American ideal conservatives claim to cherish.  Do not be a pawn in a game that you do not understand.  Instead consider this:

When a foreigner resides among you in your land, do not mistreat them. The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the Lord your God.

(Leviticus 19:33-34 NIV)

I keep running into those who argue expediency is necessary to save the country from an invasion of foreigners.  In that they’re completely fine with suspension of even the rights of US citizens so ICE can drag people off the streets for not producing proof of their legal status.  This is unlawful.  This is an infringement on the rights that were fought for during the American Revolution.  If the 4th or 5th Amendments can be ignored simply because someone looks foreign then they can be ignored if an officer claims you look guilty—and the right has been erased in a way not even George Orwell could have imagined.

If the Trump administration cared about pedophiles on the loose they would prosecute those named in the Epstein files.  Instead they continue to refuse to obey the law ordering the full and unredacted (other than victims) files.  Who or what is being protected by this ongoing cover-up?
I’ve been seeing a lot of tu quoque fallacy using indifference about one to justify their indifference about the other.  That’s not Christian love or compassion, that’s partisan hate.

Fixing the problem of illegal immigration isn’t the real aim.  At best it is a distraction.  At worse it is just another excuse (like Covid) to subvert law by using a manufactured crisis.  If the aim was truly to slow or stop illegal immigration they would go after those employing them.  What is happening is protection of our rights is being dismantled by those who—borrowing from George Bush—hate our freedom and democracy.  And, no, this is not those who the right-wing will typically identify as a threat, it is not Iran or a Muslim—it is an Israeli billionaire Shlomo Kramer saying that we need to limit the 1st Amendment to ‘protect’ it.

Those telling you it is “necessary to destroy the town to save it” have either lost their minds, lost the plot, or never cared about the ‘town’ to begin with and are deceiving you.  Those urging us to hate the foreigner, to set aside our Constitution, who side with authoritarians, are they really our friends?  Does an agent who exclaims “f*cking b*tch” right after shooting a woman an example of Christian spiritual fruit?  Is a man who attacks police with a baseball bat, who seeks to inflame tensions (literally has burned books and invaded mosques trying to provoke a Muslim response) adhering to the Romans 12:18 principle of living as peaceably with all men as is possible?

We need to police our own.  Not the other side.  We’re called to be examples, not self-exempted policemen.

We need to overcome evil with good.  We need to take on the lawless by being examples of careful application of the law.  Partisanship blinds us.  It is a tool used to keep us wasting all our ammo on each other, trapped in our cycles of violence and escalation.  We have many foreign agents among us—some with US citizenship—who claim they’re protecting us as they tear at the Christian fabric of this nation and its laws.  We need to stop being so exploitable and stand for something or we will just fall for everything.  Lang is not one of us.  He acts less Christian than the Muslims who recently saved him during one of his provocative stunts—we need to disown this fraud for the sake of the country if not the Gospel of Jesus Christ.