XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.politics.trump   
   From: invalid@none.com   
      
   In article <10keu4p$27aph$3@dont-email.me>, nuh-   
   uh@nope.com says...   
   >   
   > On 2026-01-16 18:53, Skeeter wrote:   
   > > In article <10kemhj$24cdg$3@dont-email.me>, nuh-   
   > > uh@nope.com says...   
   > >>   
   > >> On 2026-01-16 16:38, Socialism is for losers wrote:   
   > >>>>> The car sure jerked ahead as it hit him.   
   > >>>> Nope. The "officer" might have jerked, but there is video taken from   
   > >>>> outside the car and it moved off in a completely ordinary manner.   
   > >>> No, it jerked ahead.   
   > >>   
   > >> There is a video that shows it did not.   
   > >   
   > > And there are more that show it did.   
   >   
   > So produce a link to one.   
   >   
   > >>   
   > >>>   
   > >>>> And you haven't addressed that she was clearly steering away from him...   
   > >>> ...and yet she hit him.   
   > >>>   
   > >>>> ...which she wouldn't have been doing if she was "weaponizing her car".   
   > >>> Nonsense. She had to have known that she'd hit him. She just didn't   
   > >>> expect that he'd be ready with a gun.   
   > >>   
   > >> On the contrary.   
   > >>   
   > >> He was clearly moving as she began to back and turn her wheel left.   
   > >   
   > > On a one way street.   
   > >>   
   > >> Then he CHOOSES to stop in front of the left corner of her car and draw   
   > >> his weapon when one more step to his right would have put him out of any   
   > >> danger being struck.   
   > >>   
   > >> Her intent to simply leave can be inferred from the fact that she was   
   > >> turning away from him. His own cellphone video shows it.   
   > >   
   > > Why was she there?   
   > She was returning home after dropping her child at school.   
      
   Prove that. You can't because you don't know.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)