I understand your desire to change the subject from this case to something else, and to your credit, you’ve been doing that all along as new facts which appear continue to destroy all the arguments you’ve made.
Those of us who aren’t so emotionally involved have seen the truth of this almost from the very beginning. You haven’t, By way of example, your ‘shooting in the back’ theory. We instinctively knew it was nonsense, but you hung in there.
My point is simple, your biases have blinded you to the reality of this one, and your most recent post to me reiterates that.
Hang in there if you must, but you’re no good to our side if you insist on building your positions on lies.
Why are you are debating like a liberal?
My argument on this issue has been consistent; noting the discrepancy in the application of lawful use of deadly force between an agent of the state and a citizen; and the ridiculous dangers of a militarized domestic civilian security force being used on American citizens.
Those of us who aren’t so emotionally involved have seen the truth of this almost from the very beginning.
You've seen NOTHING except the same damn things the rest of us have. All you had and all you currently have, is a supposition based on reports being released.
You have no "truth" in regards to this issue - because you were not there and you have not seen the incontrovertible evidence in this case. Neither have I.
I based my questions on the reporting at the time - and given the endemic overuse of brutality and deadly force by law enforcement of late - the questions and discrepancy arguments were absolutely appropriate to make.
By way of example, your ‘shooting in the back’ theory. We instinctively knew it was nonsense, but you hung in there.
You "knew" nothing. You had only supposition based on what you saw from the reporting. Same as me.
you’re no good to our side if you insist on building your positions on lies.
My position is not going to change - because my position is exactly the same now as it was when this first began. The questions I had and the observations I made are no less relevant now or even tomorrow than when I posted them.
As far as building a position based on 'lies' - you accused me of being a 'race baiter' when I never ONCE mentioned skin color in my arguments. Then you went on to assert that I was a fool, because "it's all about race" when I never once mentioned it.
Smearing and castigating someone who disagrees with you by assigning a label for them having nothing to do with their arguments is a tactic the Left uses.
How can you be any good for Conservatism if you insist on doing likewise?