XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.politics.trump
From: nuh-uh@nope.com
On 2026-01-18 15:42, Skeeter wrote:
> In article <10kjpgn$3rq8m$6@dont-email.me>, nuh-
> uh@nope.com says...
>>
>> On 2026-01-18 08:41, Skeeter wrote:
>>> In article <10khf80$2tnfv$12@dont-email.me>, nuh-
>>> uh@nope.com says...
>>>>
>>>> On 2026-01-17 16:06, Skeeter wrote:
>>>>> 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.
>>>>
>>>> Nope. That's your ideology doing your thinking for you.
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2. But if he'd been standing close enough he COULD have been hit.
>>>>>
>>>>> And he was.
>>>>
>>>> Prove it.
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 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.
>>>>
>>>> I never said she had "no idea" where she was.
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But neither changes the fact that her intent can be inferred from her
>>>>>> actions.
>>>>>
>>>>> How about her wifes actions?
>>>> Her wife's actions should have had no bearing on the agent's actions.
>>>>
>>>> Period.
>>>
>>> But they do show you lied when you said they didn't know
>>> who they were.
>>
>> I never said that.
>
> Yes.
Quote me.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
