No, I am attempting to discuss the topic, and pointing out you have not made a case concerning the topic.Blackvegetable » 15 Jan 2026, 2:12 pm » wrote: ↑ No, you aren't.
You're pushing the party line....as you always do.
Since the fatal shooting of Renee Good in Minneapolis, administration officials have defended the use of deadly force, which agency guidelines say should be a last resort
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/15/us/p ... unity.html
There's reason these idiots are yapping about " absolute immunity "
Title: And here is another hoax that bites the dust....she didn't hit the ICE agent.Huey » 14 Jan 2026, 1:48 pm » wrote: ↑ ICE agent who shot Renee Good suffered internal bleeding, was hospitalized after she clipped him with car: DHS The immigration officer who fatally shot Minneapolis anti-ICE protester Renee Nicole Good suffered internal bleeding after being clipped in the harrowing encounter, a Department of Homeland Security official told The Post. Veteran ICE agent Jonathan Ross suffered the bleeding to his torso, the DHS official said. The DHS official did not elaborate on how severe the internal bleeding was, but Ross was hospitalized after the incident and released later that day. https://nypost.com/2026/01/14/us-news/i ... h-car-dhs/ No, she didn't hit him.
Tiny,Huey » 15 Jan 2026, 2:16 pm » wrote: ↑ No, I am attempting to discuss the topic, and pointing out you have not made a case
A "case" is not a re-recitation of your notcase....Huey » 15 Jan 2026, 2:18 pm » wrote: ↑ Title: And here is another hoax that bites the dust....she didn't hit the ICE agent.
@Blackvegetable
PS. That is how a man does it. He does not stamp his feet and in a whiny manner demand someone to post the title.
Anything for a free pair of pants, right?Blackvegetable » 14 Jan 2026, 2:12 pm » wrote: ↑ He got a bruise...
I was "clipped" by an SUV once...went to the hospital to confirm no fractures, and asked that the insured replace my trousers..
He was moving at considerably higher speed.
The party I was walking with was also clipped.Zeets2 » 15 Jan 2026, 2:25 pm » wrote: ↑ Anything for a free pair of pants, right?
Probably the last time you got a new pair!
The only way you vaporize my subject is to posts facts that he was not hit. That is the point. Not what you fantasize about.Blackvegetable » 15 Jan 2026, 2:19 pm » wrote: ↑ Tiny,
That crap won't hunt here either.
I have vaporized your talking point with facts.
Again.
And it's about time you realized that you've NEVER had anything to say that was worth hearing!Blackvegetable » 15 Jan 2026, 2:28 pm » wrote: ↑ The party I was walking with was also clipped.
He figured he would cash in.
Didn't work out very well..
But then, what can I hope to tell a guy with a 950 FICO score...
LMAO!Blackvegetable » 15 Jan 2026, 2:21 pm » wrote: ↑ A "case" is not a re-recitation of your notcase....
That is where you are wrong.Huey » 15 Jan 2026, 2:35 pm » wrote: ↑ The only way you vaporize my subject is to posts facts that he was not hit. L
Not another narrative.
Blackvegetable » 15 Jan 2026, 2:39 pm » wrote: ↑ That is where you are wrong.
Again.
It isn't about whether he was clipped...it is about whether HE created the circumstances where SHE was killed.
And there's plenty of evidence supporting that stand.
There is no question that Grafty is doing this for the spectacle...there is no logical rationale for this policy...it is self destructive.
No, that is what YOU wanna talk about. Go start your own thread.It isn't about whether he was clipped...it is about whether HE created the circumstances where SHE was killed.
I accept your surrender. When the post editing starts I know it is over.
March peacefully with the L, Toady..
no, I won. If you want to attempt to defeat me on the subjec of the thread, NOT what you want it to be.
Tiny,Huey » 15 Jan 2026, 2:56 pm » wrote: ↑ no, I won. If you want to attempt to defeat me on the subjec of the thread, NOT what you want it to be.
1. Post some citations with links that dispute he was hit by the car. Which is the subject.
or
2. admit I am right THEN make you case on the diversion.
If not, it is your L.
There is noting to defend on the actual topic of the thread. Just admit the agent got hit by the vehicle and I will move on to your diversion.Blackvegetable » 15 Jan 2026, 3:12 pm » wrote: ↑ Tiny,
You don't know how to make a case...accordingly you cannot possibly win.
You can't defend what FOX and the NYPost tell you to rebleat, therefore anything that challenges the narrative is "off topic".
The first is accuracy, the second is relevance, a third is intent.Huey » 15 Jan 2026, 3:17 pm » wrote: ↑ There is noting to defend on the actual topic of the thread. Just admit the agent got hit by the vehicle and I will move on to your diversion.
Blackvegetable » 15 Jan 2026, 3:23 pm » wrote: ↑ The first is accuracy, the second is relevance, a third is intent.
Well at least I answered please give us the answer