5 hours ago, newnative said:

Well, Trump has 34 felony convictions so I think I can be excused for getting one of his many offenses wrong. Despite all your tap dancing, we have a US president with felony convictions--the first and only--who has also been found liable for sexual assault. In addition to being found liable in a long list of civil cases, he narrowly escaped being criminally prosecuted for his actions on January 6th, and for election tampering, by being elected President, which shielded him. Improperly, in my opinion. The long list of his wrongdoings is bad, no matter how you want to downplay it and pretend it's not. It beggars belief that, at this point and with all that is known, anyone could support such a person, be they liberal, conservative, or anywhere inbetween.

None of that is relevant. Can't you come up with something relevant?

5 minutes ago, newnative said:

You're the one that didn't answer the question I posed. Why was the agent standing in front of Ms. Good's car, breaking both the law and several ICE rules and regulations? Remember, he had no warrant and no probable cause. And, Ms. Good was not impeding any Federal investigation; the agents could easily have driven around her car, as other vehicles did. Correctly if I am wrong but I read that the agents were returning to their base so they were not engaged in an investigation that might be impeded in the first place.

But, in any case, here's the thing. When you're a MAGA toady and you try to use the Nazi Big Lie strategy, you need to make sure the truth is tightly controlled and kept from the public. Easy to do in Nazi Germany, much harder these days with everyone carrying a video recorder on their cell phones.

Poor, dumb, incompetent Kristi spouted her Big Lies way too quickly. By now, any idiot should know that there might be video that will emerge that will actually show the truth. In this case, tons of it, easily disputing every Big Lie she told. Floundering, she does something even dumber, releasing the agent's video. How anyone could possibly think hearing the agent cursing the unarmed mother of three, after he just murdered her, would help their case is beyond me.

You responder to this post of mine:

"It's not that you guys get it wrong, it's that you keep regurgitating the lie, even after you know is a lie.

You guys always bring up the "34 felony convictions". Do you have any idea what they were for? Can you name five of them? You can't.

What specific actions did he take regarding January 6th do you think were criminal? You have no idea, do you?

And if his actions in regard to January 6th were criminal, why did they DOJ wait over three and a half years to charge him?"

As is typical of the left, you were not able to answer any of these questions, you just asked me why the officer was standing in from of the car. I assume he was standing there so that the driver was not able to flee the scene.

Now are you going to answer my questions? No, you won't.

4 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

You responder to this post of mine:

"It's not that you guys get it wrong, it's that you keep regurgitating the lie, even after you know is a lie.

You guys always bring up the "34 felony convictions". Do you have any idea what they were for? Can you name five of them? You can't.

What specific actions did he take regarding January 6th do you think were criminal? You have no idea, do you?

And if his actions in regard to January 6th were criminal, why did they DOJ wait over three and a half years to charge him?"

As is typical of the left, you were not able to answer any of these questions, you just asked me why the officer was standing in from of the car. I assume he was standing there so that the driver was not able to flee the scene.

Now are you going to answer my questions? No, you won't.

Chummy, I think you're on the wrong thread..........🤣

37 minutes ago, newnative said:

Why should I be required to recite specifics of Trump's wrongdoing? I'm not making it my life's work to memorize everything he has done wrong and all the many legal judgments against him. And, indeed, a very long and ever-changing list it would be to try to keep track of. Jack Smith believes there was ample evidence to convict him. He is the one with the most complete information and I'll go with his take. You're welcome to believe Trump was pure as the driven snow. Why the DOJ took so long to investigate, I have no idea. Certainly benefitted Trump.

In any case, it's all just rearranging the deck chairs. Endlessly debating the degree of how bad Trump's actions were, and still are, ignores the main takeaway, which is Trump's total unfitness to be President, which has resulted in America now being in the horrible state it is in.

You're not required support any of the nonsense you regurgitate. Being a leftist means never having to explain or understand anything.

Jack Smith is a political hack. You should read (but you won't) about how he ruined Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell's life with a phony politically driven prosecution that resulted in a conviction, saving the election for the left. Of course, the conviction was overturned unanimously by the Supreme Court, but the left had their win. That was the whole plan with Trump.

3 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

You're not required support any of the nonsense you regurgitate. Being a leftist means never having to explain or understand anything.

Jack Smith is a political hack. You should read (but you won't) about how he ruined Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell's life with a phony politically driven prosecution that resulted in a conviction, saving the election for the left. Of course, the conviction was overturned unanimously by the Supreme Court, but the left had their win. That was the whole plan with Trump.

Ooooooh, the blanket lefty thing again.................😂

Sooo funny, so what will you call republicans that WILL vote Democrats next time, pray tell.......🤗..........🤣

22 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

What are the statutes cited, and or which one of these cases was similar situation?

You're just being deliberating obtuse (why am I surprised).

Firstly, as clearly stated in my post (if you actually read it) all of the cases I quoted are all similar as they all involved law enforcement shooting at a moving vehicle. All the judgement were handed down and set precedent which if you then had a tiny bity of legal knowledge effectively creates binding law for lower courts, based on the principle of star decisis, meaning courts must follow past rulings in similar cases, ensuring consistency and predictability, with the US Supreme Court setting nationwide precedent. In effect it means that 1) officers are not allowed to fire into a moving vehicle 2) lethal force is not allowed to prevent someone from fleeing 3) an officer cannot accidentally place himself in front of a vehicle and then allege self defense.

What this ICE officer did was illegal in so many ways, but I guess you simply don't care because of your myopic view of anything that goes against your own echo chamber.

1 hour ago, Yellowtail said:

You responder to this post of mine:

"It's not that you guys get it wrong, it's that you keep regurgitating the lie, even after you know is a lie.

You guys always bring up the "34 felony convictions". Do you have any idea what they were for? Can you name five of them? You can't.

What specific actions did he take regarding January 6th do you think were criminal? You have no idea, do you?

And if his actions in regard to January 6th were criminal, why did they DOJ wait over three and a half years to charge him?"

As is typical of the left, you were not able to answer any of these questions, you just asked me why the officer was standing in from of the car. I assume he was standing there so that the driver was not able to flee the scene.

Now are you going to answer my questions? No, you won't.

Already answered in my other post.

43 minutes ago, newnative said:

Already answered in my other post.

Sure you did lefty.

1 hour ago, johnnybangkok said:

You're just being deliberating obtuse (why am I surprised).

Firstly, as clearly stated in my post (if you actually read it) all of the cases I quoted are all similar as they all involved law enforcement shooting at a moving vehicle. All the judgement were handed down and set precedent which if you then had a tiny bity of legal knowledge effectively creates binding law for lower courts, based on the principle of star decisis, meaning courts must follow past rulings in similar cases, ensuring consistency and predictability, with the US Supreme Court setting nationwide precedent. In effect it means that 1) officers are not allowed to fire into a moving vehicle 2) lethal force is not allowed to prevent someone from fleeing 3) an officer cannot accidentally place himself in front of a vehicle and then allege self defense.

What this ICE officer did was illegal in so many ways, but I guess you simply don't care because of your myopic view of anything that goes against your own echo chamber.

So you don't know, I thought not.

Each of the cases you listed had big holes,

3 hours ago, Patong2021 said:

None of that is relevant. Can't you come up with something relevant?

You are welcome to check my other posts, most of which are more relevant to the thread. Or, ignore them completely.

6 minutes ago, newnative said:

You are welcome to check my other posts, most of which are more relevant to the thread. Or, ignore them completely.

You mean regurgitating lying leftists and dodging questions?

Arguing with idiots is like playing chess with a pigeon. No matter how good you are, the bird is going to $hit on the board and strut around like it won anyway.

1 hour ago, Yellowtail said:

Sure you did lefty.

Screaming lefty into the abyss… again.

28 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

So because she was sideways in the road, she had to turn right to flee the crime scene, yes?

Had she not turned right, she would have run into the curb/snow. yes?

Why was she blocking the ICE vehicle in the road?

Why did she move the vehicle at all?

"Had she not turned right, she would have run into the curb/snow. yes?"

If she not turned right, she would have run into the ICEshooter. yes?

6 hours ago, BKKKevin said:

Confused Lefty Librard here...

Can you answer one question?...

Why is it ok to bludgeon a Capitol police officer with an American flag and not call a masked ICE police officer "Big Boy"?

5 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

Redundant

I'm not a leftist, I'll answer anything.

You are assuming facts not in evidence. As far as I know, it is illegal to bludgeon anyone with anything, much less a Capitol Police officer using an American flag.

I do not believe it is illegal to call an ICE officer "Big Boy", and I know of no one claiming it is.

Like most every leftist here, you are not able to formulate a coherent argument, so you rely on falsehoods and deception.

Any more questions?

5 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

"Any more questions?"

Yes, I have:

What MAGA disease do you have that leads to a yellow tail and such stupid answers?
Maybe Robert F. Kennedy can help you?

1 minute ago, BerndD said:

"Had she not turned right, she would have run into the curb/snow. yes?"

If she not turned right, she would have run into the ICEshooter. yes?

Education major?

She did run into the ICE age agent.

2 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Education major?

She did run into the ICE age agent.

And you've been running your head against a concrete wall for a long time. The damage is significant, not to the wall..

Just now, BerndD said:

And you've been running your head against a concrete wall for a long time. The damage is significant, not to the wall..

PhEd?

2 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

PhEd?

No pharmaceutical education is necessary to diagnose your brain damage...

1 minute ago, BerndD said:

5 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

PhEd?

Oh, you flunked out getting loaded, that makes sense. So you teach English up-county now for B30K a month now?

1 hour ago, Yellowtail said:

Oh, you flunked out getting loaded, that makes sense. So you teach English up-county now for B30K a month now?

Unlike you, I don't need that. But maybe you will receive B30K per month from Uncle Donnie. But that's not worth your MAGA ramblings.
So and now that's enough. It's just stupid and pointless to get involved with a yellow tailed MAGA clown.

2 minutes ago, BerndD said:

Unlike you, I don't need that. But maybe you will receive B30K per month from Uncle Donnie. But that's not worth your MAGA ramblings.
So and now that's enough. It's just stupid and pointless to get involved with a yellow tailed MAGA clown.

Go with God brother!