XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.politics.trump   
   From: invalid@none.com   
      
   In article <10kjrrv$3rq66$18@dont-email.me>, nuh-   
   uh@nope.com says...   
   >   
   > On 2026-01-17 16:05, Skeeter wrote:   
   > > In article <10kh30s$2tn8q$2@dont-email.me>, nuh-   
   > > uh@nope.com says...   
   > >>   
   > >> On 2026-01-15 16:31, Skeeter wrote:   
   > >>> In article <10kbv40$15km4$22@dont-email.me>, nuh-   
   > >>> uh@nope.com says...   
   > >>>>   
   > >>>> On 2026-01-15 15:55, Skeeter wrote:   
   > >>>>> In article <10kbs60$15km6$5@dont-email.me>, nuh-   
   > >>>>> uh@nope.com says...   
   > >>>>>>   
   > >>>>>> On 2026-01-15 15:08, Skeeter wrote:   
   > >>>>>>> In article <10kbpr2$15km4$1@dont-email.me>, nuh-   
   > >>>>>>> uh@nope.com says...   
   > >>>>>>>>   
   > >>>>>>>> On 2026-01-15 13:12, Skeeter wrote:   
   > >>>>>>>>> In article <10kbi85$122uj$1@dont-email.me>, nuh-   
   > >>>>>>>>> uh@nope.com says...   
   > >>>>>>>>>> He chose to remain there when a single step to his right would   
   have   
   > >>>>>>>>>> taken him out of the danger area.   
   > >>>>>>>>>>   
   > >>>>>>>>>   
   > >>>>>>>>> and she would still be alive if shw just would have   
   > >>>>>>>>> followed orders.   
   > >>>>>>>>   
   > >>>>>>>> What "order" was she given?   
   > >>>>>>>   
   > >>>>>>> Get out of the car.   
   > >>>>>>   
   > >>>>>> Show a video where that is heard.   
   > >>>>>>   
   > >>>>>>>>   
   > >>>>>>>> I've watched the videos: there was not order given to her.   
   > >>>>>>>   
   > >>>>>>> There was. Why did you ignore the video of her "wife"   
   > >>>>>>> taunting the agents?   
   > >>>>>> How is it relevant?   
   > >>>>>>   
   > >>>>>> "Taunting" is most definitely free speech.   
   > >>>>>   
   > >>>>> You ignored that. You ignored that she was running around   
   > >>>>> the car doing it while the other bitch was making a   
   > >>>>> "turn"?   
   > >>>> What relevance is it to the fact that in contravention of policy, the   
   > >>>> "agent" stopped in front of the vehicle that he could see was about to   
   > >>>> move ahead?   
   > >>>   
   > >>> Plenty, it shows intent.   
   > >>   
   > >> It shows his intent to create a threat in order to have a reason to shoot.   
   > >   
   > > So you read his mind too?   
   >   
   > Again: inferred from his ACTIONS.   
   >   
   > He was walking and CHOSE to stop in front of her at the time he KNEW she   
   > would be moving away to his left.   
      
   You're like a fucking parrot. Old and stale also. Will   
   never hold up in court.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)