XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.politics.trump   
   From: invalid@none.com   
      
   In article <10kh15n$2tajo$4@dont-email.me>, nuh-   
   uh@nope.com says...   
   >   
   > On 2026-01-17 06:56, NoBody wrote:   
   > > On Fri, 16 Jan 2026 20:17:15 -0800, Alan  wrote:   
   > >   
   > >> On 2026-01-16 19:44, Skeeter wrote:   
   > >>> In article <10kes86$26qks$5@dont-email.me>, nuh-   
   > >>> uh@nope.com says...   
   > >>>>   
   > >>>> On 2026-01-16 18:14, Skeeter wrote:   
   > >>>>> In article <10keiop$23gth$3@dont-email.me>, nuh-   
   > >>>>> uh@nope.com says...   
   > >>>>>>   
   > >>>>>> On 2026-01-16 09:24, AlleyCat wrote:   
   > >>>>>>>   
   > >>>>>>> ... and say this.   
   > >>>>>>>   
   > >>>>>>> On Thu, 15 Jan 2026 14:34:23 -0800,  Alan says...   
   > >>>>>>>   
   > >>>>>>>>> Road?   
   > >>>>>>>>>   
   > >>>>>>>>> https://i.imgur.com/OC9smu9.mp4   
   > >>>>>>>>>   
   > >>>>>>>>> https://i.imgur.com/Lfbiqwg.jpeg   
   > >>>>>>>>>   
   > >>>>>>>>> See those people standing thar, stoopit? WHAT are they standing on?   
   > >>>>>>>>   
   > >>>>>>>> Were any of those people in the direction she intended to travel?   
   > >>>>>>>   
   > >>>>>>> Sure they were.   
   > >>>>>>>   
   > >>>>>>> How do YOU know where Good was "intending to travel"?   
   > >>>>>>>   
   > >>>>>>> You don't.   
   > >>>>>>>   
   > >>>>>>> I was making an illustrative point. YOU moved the goalposts, as   
   usual, with   
   > >>>>>>> your fallacy of the specific.   
   > >>>>>>>   
   > >>>>>>> She could have gone down the street MADE A 3-POINT TURN and came   
   back at the   
   > >>>>>>> officers, them, having to draw the weapons again and shoot her again.   
   > >>>>>> So by pretending you know her intent was to run over an "officer"...   
   > >>>>>   
   > >>>>> Well you seem to be able to read minds you tell us.   
   > >>>>   
   > >>>> So when he states her intent he's NOT reading minds?   
   > >>>   
   > >>> BUTWHATABOUT!   
   > >>>>   
   > >>>>>>   
   > >>>>>> ...you then pretend they need to protect against future "attacks".   
   > >>>>>>   
   > >>>>>> She was turning away from the officer, doofus.   
   > >>>>>   
   > >>>>> On a one way street on a very icy road. No telling what   
   > >>>>> could happen.   
   > >>>> Actually there is "telling" that the car could not have gone to its left   
   > >>>> with the wheels turned right.   
   > >>>   
   > >>> But it went straight.   
   > >>   
   > >> No, it most certainly did not. COULD not have with the wheels turned all   
   > >> the way to the right.   
   > >   
   > > But you claim he was standing in front.  If she turned she wouldn't   
   > > have him with the front headlight.   
   >  > > You can't have things both ways dingdong.   
   >   
   > 1. We don't know that he was actually hit.   
      
   "we" do know.   
   >   
   > 2. But if he'd been standing close enough he COULD have been hit.   
      
   And he was.   
   >   
   > Seriously, this isn't tough to have figured out on your own, numbnuts.   
      
   Your opinions have gone from her having no idea where she   
   was to she was only going home.   
   >   
   > But neither changes the fact that her intent can be inferred from her   
   > actions.   
      
   How about her wifes actions?   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)