XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.politics.trump   
   From: nuh-uh@nope.com   
      
   On 2026-01-15 04:39, NoBody wrote:   
   > On Wed, 14 Jan 2026 14:44:39 -0800, Alan  wrote:   
   >   
   >> On 2026-01-12 09:39, AlleyCat wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>> On Sun, 11 Jan 2026 23:17:28 -0800,  Alan says...   
   >>>   
   >>>>> IDENTIFICATION, maybe?   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> https://i.imgur.com/DcWxMed.jpg   
   >>>>> https://i.imgur.com/aG2QU6c.jpg   
   >>>>   
   >>>> He didn't have a bodycam?   
   >>>   
   >>> Hmmm... I do not know.   
   >>>   
   >>> Did YOU see a body cam?   
   >>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>> ...if he thought this person was a threat?   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Who said that?   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> WHO said what the agent "thought"?   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Back into the mind-reading business, are we?   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> PAAAAALONK!   
   >>>   
   >>>> Training.   
   >>>   
   >>> LOL... yours or his?   
   >>>   
   >>> Yours: tell us of this training. Tell us what YOUR training was when you   
   were   
   >>> about to be run over by a domestic insurrectionist terrorist, who was   
   blocking   
   >>> a federal agent, you, from performing your duty as an ICE agent.   
   >>   
   >> How was her leaving "blocking" him?   
   >   
   > Why did you dodge his question.  It's a very straightforward one.   
      
   There was no "question" put to me.   
      
   I did go and look up the CBP's "Use of Force Policy".   
      
   And you're engaging in circular argument.   
      
   >   
   >>   
   >>>   
   >>> His: tell us of his training. Tell us what HIS training was when he was   
   about   
   >>> to be run over by a domestic insurrectionist terrorist, who was blocking   
   him   
   >>> and his fellow federal agents, from performing his/their duties as ICE   
   agents.   
   >>   
   >> I thought you'd never ask!   
   >>   
   >> 'Chapter 1: General Guidelines   
   >>   
   >> C. Use of Safe Tactics   
   >>   
   >> 2. Except where otherwise required by inspections or other operations,   
   >> Authorized Officers/Agents should avoid standing directly in front of or   
   >> behind a subject vehicle. Officers/agents should not place themselves in   
   >> the path of a moving vehicle or use their body to block a vehicle’s path.   
   >   
   > Pulling this out again I see.  He was not "in front" until she   
   > reversed her vehicle and changed her angle.   
   >   
   > Good grief.   
      
   Sorry, but he was walking into that position.   
      
   >   
   >>   
   >> 3. Authorized Officers/Agents should avoid intentionally and   
   >> unreasonably placing themselves in positions in which they have no   
   >> alternative to using deadly force.'   
   >   
   > He did.  SHE changed that equation.   
      
   He chose to remain there when a single step to his right would have   
   taken him out of the danger area.   
      
   >   
   >>   
   >> 'Chapter 2: Use of Deadly Force   
   >>   
   >> A. General Guidelines and Responsibilities   
   >>   
   >> 7. Authorized Officers/Agents shall not discharge their firearms at the   
   >> operator of a moving vehicle, vessel, or aircraft unless deadly force is   
   >> necessary, that is, when the officer/agent has a reasonable belief that   
   >> the operator poses an imminent danger of serious bodily injury or death   
   >> to the officer/agent or to another person.   
   >   
   > Shooting to avoid being killed by van  seems pretty "necessary" to me.   
   > Perhaps you should take the time to actually understand the   
   > regulations you post?   
      
   '2. Authorized Officers/Agents should avoid standing directly in front   
   of or behind a subject vehicle. Officers/agents should not place   
   themselves in the path of a moving vehicle or use their body to block a   
   vehicle’s path.   
      
   3. Authorized Officers/Agents should avoid intentionally and   
   unreasonably placing themselves in positions in which they have no   
   alternative to using deadly force.'   
      
   >   
   >>   
   >> a. Such deadly force may include a moving vehicle aimed at   
   >> officers/agents or others present, but would not include a moving   
   >> vehicle merely fleeing from officers/agents unless the vehicle or the   
   >> escape of the subject poses an imminent threat of serious bodily injury   
   >> or death to the officer/agent or to another person.'   
   >   
   > She had not yet fled when she hit him with the FRONT of her van.  Are   
   > agents hired to be mind readers too?   
      
   She wasn't "fleeing" at all, she was LEAVING. She was clearly executing   
   a 3-point turn to go back the way she'd come.   
      
   >   
   > Most liberals have had the good sense to realize that this line is   
   > complete garbage and have wandered away.   
      
   The administration has lied about this from the first moment.   
      
   At first they said there were "rioters" present.   
      
      
      
   That was a lie.   
      
   Trump posted that the the "officer" had been "run over".   
      
      
      
   That was a lie...   
      
   ...along with claiming she was "disorderly", "violent" and "vicious".   
      
   I can produce more lies if you'd like.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)