XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, nz.politics   
   From: MeanDog@Snarl.Dash   
      
   On Thu, 8 Jan 2026 20:10:28 -0600, super70s   
    wrote:   
      
   >On 2026-01-08 22:57:29 +0000, Socialism is for losers said:   
   >   
   >> On Thu, 8 Jan 2026 16:25:57 -0600, super70s   
   >>  wrote:   
   >>   
   >>> On 2026-01-08 21:09:46 +0000, Socialism is for losers said:   
   >>>   
   >>>> On Thu, 8 Jan 2026 14:50:00 -0600, super70s   
   >>>>  wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>> On 2026-01-08 20:46:10 +0000, Socialism is for losers said:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>> On Thu, 8 Jan 2026 15:22:19 -0500, -hh   
   >>>>>>  wrote:   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> On 1/8/26 11:49, Socialism is for losers wrote:   
   >>>>>>>> On Thu, 8 Jan 2026 08:11:29 -0600, super70s   
   >>>>>>>>  wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> On 2026-01-08 13:00:12 +0000, -hh said:   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> On 1/8/26 05:25, Socialism is for losers wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 8 Jan 2026 05:22:28 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D´Oliveiro   
   >>>>>>>>>>>  wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 7 Jan 2026 13:32:48 -0600, Ken wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> No mention of the fact that the dead person was trying to run   
   over   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> ICE agents??   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> Notice the shot was from an oblique angle. That (as well as the   
   video   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> itself) shows the shooter was not in the path of the vehicle.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> Yet he clealy got hit.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> Where does the TTP state that an officer should deliberately stand   
   in   
   >>>>>>>>>> front of an operating vehicle?  Chapter & verse with cite, please.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> Putting yourself in harm's way when the TTP doesn't call for that   
   >>>>>>>>>> doctrine is a standards violation...   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> ...and escalation to try to cover for your mistake isn't justified.   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> -hh   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> They're notorious for standing by the front quarter panel of a car,   
   out   
   >>>>>>>>> of harm's way but close enough to claim they were "in fear of their   
   >>>>>>>>> lives" if they shoot someone. This is not the first time an incident   
   >>>>>>>>> like this has happened with them.   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> She hit him and she got what she deserved.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Barely, and that was despite how he deliberately stepped in front of a   
   >>>>>>> running vehicle.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> FWIW, Adam Cochran has said that he's spoken on background with two   
   >>>>>>> attorneys who have defended officer involved shootings.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Both have always taken their cases to trial.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> After reviewing the events today, both said if it were their client   
   >>>>>>> they’d advise:   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> - Seek a plea deal   
   >>>>>>> - Be willing to plead guilty to a lesser crime or a lower sentence   
   >>>>>>> - Accept anything that isn’t de jure LWOP (life with out parole)   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> In other words, the guys who defend police officers shooting for a   
   >>>>>>> living, think this case is unwinnable.  They would try to defend his   
   >>>>>>> actions, they’d just try and lower the impact of the outcome.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Their main sticking point were:   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> - "I could argue shot number one and hope for an acquittal or a hung   
   >>>>>>> jury - but I can’t get there on shots 2 and 3"   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> - "A jury will not get passed the turning of the wheels"   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> - "Denying medics throws self defense out the window"   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> -hh   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> It will depend on the jury.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Yeah a Minneapolis jury, not one in Alabammy. Good luck.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> No...  Federal agents are immune from state and local prosecution when   
   >>>> acting on official business.   
   >>>   
   >>> You were the one who brought up a jury dweeb.   
   >>   
   >> Yeah...  do you have a point?   
   >   
   >?   
   >   
   >You say: "It will depend on the jury."   
   >   
   >I say: "Yeah a Minneapolis jury, not one in Alabammy. Good luck."   
   >   
   >You say: "No... Federal agents are immune from state and local   
   >prosecution when acting on official business."   
   >   
   >Is your brain engaging before you hit the "Send" button?   
   >   
   >>> This guy's gonna get his ass sued off in a civil suit at the very   
   >>> least, cost him a lot more than his $50K sign-on bonus.   
   >>   
   >> It vould happen, but not likely.   
   >   
   >Why isn't it likely. As O.J. Simpson found out the bar is quite lower   
   >in a civil case than a criminal one.   
      
   OJ didn't have a self defense argument.   
      
   >>  If it does, he'd have lots of money   
   >> coming in.   
   >   
   >And so will her partner to pursue him legally until he dies.   
   >   
   >>> Also get doxxed sooner or later, AI will see to that.   
   >>   
   >> He may have to shoot someone else.   
   >   
   >For another unjustifiable homicide, he's chomping at the bit no doubt.   
      
   --   
   Only losers want Socialism or Communism.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)