Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
You're an idiot, Marty. The cop protecting law makers had no idea if she was personally armed or not. He also had no way of knowing if had he let her gain access to the House chamber, the mob wouldn't have followed her.Nothing's been blown out of proportion just because you're a faithful idiot. That woman was a threat to lawmakers when attempted to gain access to where they were hiding.No need for quotations. The fact that they were violent is evidence in the damage and destruction they were doing in order to breach the barricaded doors.A "violent" mob that had armed police officers mingling with it just on the other side of the door, being breached by an unarmed woman.
You're also avoiding the question, probably because you know the answer.
No, just watching you jump through hoops to blow things out of proportion for political gain.
an unarmed woman was a threat....
Anytime you start losing the argument, you change the subject or devolve to childish vulgar insults.After 40 or so pages of the same stuff, it's not cowardice, it's for my own amusement.
It's not exactly subtle and it's not intellectual bravery you're displaying. The fact this is amusing demonstrates that you're a troll. Not someone to be taken seriously.
You're an idiot, Marty. The cop protecting law makers had no idea if she was personally armed or not. He also had no way of knowing if had he let her gain access to the House chamber, the mob wouldn't have followed her.Nothing's been blown out of proportion just because you're a faithful idiot. That woman was a threat to lawmakers when attempted to gain access to where they were hiding.No need for quotations. The fact that they were violent is evidence in the damage and destruction they were doing in order to breach the barricaded doors.A "violent" mob that had armed police officers mingling with it just on the other side of the door, being breached by an unarmed woman.
You're also avoiding the question, probably because you know the answer.
No, just watching you jump through hoops to blow things out of proportion for political gain.
an unarmed woman was a threat....
It was a good shoot. That's why he won't be charged with a crime.
Of course he was as were the lawmakers behind him. That mob was smashing through the doors and began to enter the Speaker's Lobby. It was his duty to keep them out. He did a fine job as not one single Trump cultist got into the House chamber until all the lawmakers inside were safely escorted out.You're an idiot, Marty. The cop protecting law makers had no idea if she was personally armed or not. He also had no way of knowing if had he let her gain access to the House chamber, the mob wouldn't have followed her.Nothing's been blown out of proportion just because you're a faithful idiot. That woman was a threat to lawmakers when attempted to gain access to where they were hiding.No need for quotations. The fact that they were violent is evidence in the damage and destruction they were doing in order to breach the barricaded doors.A "violent" mob that had armed police officers mingling with it just on the other side of the door, being breached by an unarmed woman.
You're also avoiding the question, probably because you know the answer.
No, just watching you jump through hoops to blow things out of proportion for political gain.
an unarmed woman was a threat....
It was a good shoot. That's why he won't be charged with a crime.
He wasn't in immediate risk, shown by the other cops being interspersed with the protesters on the one side of the door.
What makes me think they know it's a bad shoot is the length of time it's taking to come up with a result of the investigation, and the complete dropping of the matter by the media.
And why hasn't his name been released yet? Any other officer in any other shooting under investigation would have been identified.
The conversation only devolved when you realized you were losing.Trolling is from the get go, trolling isn't being a "ha ha" asshole once the discourse has devolved to rehashing the same shit over and over.
Of course he was as were the lawmakers behind him. That mob was smashing through the doors and began to enter the Speaker's Lobby. It was his duty to keep them out. He did a fine job as not one single Trump cultist got into the House chamber until all the lawmakers inside were safely escorted out.You're an idiot, Marty. The cop protecting law makers had no idea if she was personally armed or not. He also had no way of knowing if had he let her gain access to the House chamber, the mob wouldn't have followed her.Nothing's been blown out of proportion just because you're a faithful idiot. That woman was a threat to lawmakers when attempted to gain access to where they were hiding.No need for quotations. The fact that they were violent is evidence in the damage and destruction they were doing in order to breach the barricaded doors.A "violent" mob that had armed police officers mingling with it just on the other side of the door, being breached by an unarmed woman.
You're also avoiding the question, probably because you know the answer.
No, just watching you jump through hoops to blow things out of proportion for political gain.
an unarmed woman was a threat....
It was a good shoot. That's why he won't be charged with a crime.
He wasn't in immediate risk, shown by the other cops being interspersed with the protesters on the one side of the door.
What makes me think they know it's a bad shoot is the length of time it's taking to come up with a result of the investigation, and the complete dropping of the matter by the media.
And why hasn't his name been released yet? Any other officer in any other shooting under investigation would have been identified.
The conversation only devolved when you realized you were losing.Trolling is from the get go, trolling isn't being a "ha ha" asshole once the discourse has devolved to rehashing the same shit over and over.
She was the only one shot because she was the only one who tried to enter. Had she not been shot, the rest of the mob behind her would have followed, just as they had throughout the Capitol. That cop deserves a medal.Of course he was as were the lawmakers behind him. That mob was smashing through the doors and began to enter the Speaker's Lobby. It was his duty to keep them out. He did a fine job as not one single Trump cultist got into the House chamber until all the lawmakers inside were safely escorted out.You're an idiot, Marty. The cop protecting law makers had no idea if she was personally armed or not. He also had no way of knowing if had he let her gain access to the House chamber, the mob wouldn't have followed her.Nothing's been blown out of proportion just because you're a faithful idiot. That woman was a threat to lawmakers when attempted to gain access to where they were hiding.No need for quotations. The fact that they were violent is evidence in the damage and destruction they were doing in order to breach the barricaded doors.A "violent" mob that had armed police officers mingling with it just on the other side of the door, being breached by an unarmed woman.
You're also avoiding the question, probably because you know the answer.
No, just watching you jump through hoops to blow things out of proportion for political gain.
an unarmed woman was a threat....
It was a good shoot. That's why he won't be charged with a crime.
He wasn't in immediate risk, shown by the other cops being interspersed with the protesters on the one side of the door.
What makes me think they know it's a bad shoot is the length of time it's taking to come up with a result of the investigation, and the complete dropping of the matter by the media.
And why hasn't his name been released yet? Any other officer in any other shooting under investigation would have been identified.
By shooting an unarmed woman, pour encouragement les autres.
Don't think that's in the use of deadly force guidelines.
She was the only one shot because she was the only one who tried to enter. Had she not been shot, the rest of the mob behind her would have followed, just as they had throughout the Capitol. That cop deserves a medal.Of course he was as were the lawmakers behind him. That mob was smashing through the doors and began to enter the Speaker's Lobby. It was his duty to keep them out. He did a fine job as not one single Trump cultist got into the House chamber until all the lawmakers inside were safely escorted out.You're an idiot, Marty. The cop protecting law makers had no idea if she was personally armed or not. He also had no way of knowing if had he let her gain access to the House chamber, the mob wouldn't have followed her.Nothing's been blown out of proportion just because you're a faithful idiot. That woman was a threat to lawmakers when attempted to gain access to where they were hiding.No need for quotations. The fact that they were violent is evidence in the damage and destruction they were doing in order to breach the barricaded doors.A "violent" mob that had armed police officers mingling with it just on the other side of the door, being breached by an unarmed woman.
You're also avoiding the question, probably because you know the answer.
No, just watching you jump through hoops to blow things out of proportion for political gain.
an unarmed woman was a threat....
It was a good shoot. That's why he won't be charged with a crime.
He wasn't in immediate risk, shown by the other cops being interspersed with the protesters on the one side of the door.
What makes me think they know it's a bad shoot is the length of time it's taking to come up with a result of the investigation, and the complete dropping of the matter by the media.
And why hasn't his name been released yet? Any other officer in any other shooting under investigation would have been identified.
By shooting an unarmed woman, pour encouragement les autres.
Don't think that's in the use of deadly force guidelines.
Case in point.No it devolved because you are an uninspired nanny state cuck.
No government dick too big to suck for you.
You're an idiot, Marty. Such protocols permit the use of lethal force if such force is reasonably believed necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm. Given that lunatic mob stormed the Capitol and was hunting for politicians to murder, that's a reasonable belief.She was the only one shot because she was the only one who tried to enter. Had she not been shot, the rest of the mob behind her would have followed, just as they had throughout the Capitol. That cop deserves a medal.Of course he was as were the lawmakers behind him. That mob was smashing through the doors and began to enter the Speaker's Lobby. It was his duty to keep them out. He did a fine job as not one single Trump cultist got into the House chamber until all the lawmakers inside were safely escorted out.You're an idiot, Marty. The cop protecting law makers had no idea if she was personally armed or not. He also had no way of knowing if had he let her gain access to the House chamber, the mob wouldn't have followed her.Nothing's been blown out of proportion just because you're a faithful idiot. That woman was a threat to lawmakers when attempted to gain access to where they were hiding.No need for quotations. The fact that they were violent is evidence in the damage and destruction they were doing in order to breach the barricaded doors.A "violent" mob that had armed police officers mingling with it just on the other side of the door, being breached by an unarmed woman.
You're also avoiding the question, probably because you know the answer.
No, just watching you jump through hoops to blow things out of proportion for political gain.
an unarmed woman was a threat....
It was a good shoot. That's why he won't be charged with a crime.
He wasn't in immediate risk, shown by the other cops being interspersed with the protesters on the one side of the door.
What makes me think they know it's a bad shoot is the length of time it's taking to come up with a result of the investigation, and the complete dropping of the matter by the media.
And why hasn't his name been released yet? Any other officer in any other shooting under investigation would have been identified.
By shooting an unarmed woman, pour encouragement les autres.
Don't think that's in the use of deadly force guidelines.
Still not justified via use of deadly force protocols.
Case in point.No it devolved because you are an uninspired nanny state cuck.
No government dick too big to suck for you.
You guys really have a hard time accepting any responsibility for anything. It's always "you made me make an ass of myself" with you.
You're an idiot, Marty. Such protocols permit the use of lethal force if such force is reasonably believed necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm. Given that lunatic mob stormed the Capitol and was hunting for politicians to murder, that's a reasonable belief.She was the only one shot because she was the only one who tried to enter. Had she not been shot, the rest of the mob behind her would have followed, just as they had throughout the Capitol. That cop deserves a medal.Of course he was as were the lawmakers behind him. That mob was smashing through the doors and began to enter the Speaker's Lobby. It was his duty to keep them out. He did a fine job as not one single Trump cultist got into the House chamber until all the lawmakers inside were safely escorted out.You're an idiot, Marty. The cop protecting law makers had no idea if she was personally armed or not. He also had no way of knowing if had he let her gain access to the House chamber, the mob wouldn't have followed her.Nothing's been blown out of proportion just because you're a faithful idiot. That woman was a threat to lawmakers when attempted to gain access to where they were hiding.No need for quotations. The fact that they were violent is evidence in the damage and destruction they were doing in order to breach the barricaded doors.A "violent" mob that had armed police officers mingling with it just on the other side of the door, being breached by an unarmed woman.
You're also avoiding the question, probably because you know the answer.
No, just watching you jump through hoops to blow things out of proportion for political gain.
an unarmed woman was a threat....
It was a good shoot. That's why he won't be charged with a crime.
He wasn't in immediate risk, shown by the other cops being interspersed with the protesters on the one side of the door.
What makes me think they know it's a bad shoot is the length of time it's taking to come up with a result of the investigation, and the complete dropping of the matter by the media.
And why hasn't his name been released yet? Any other officer in any other shooting under investigation would have been identified.
By shooting an unarmed woman, pour encouragement les autres.
Don't think that's in the use of deadly force guidelines.
Still not justified via use of deadly force protocols.
Truth hurts, soi boi.
Reasonable threat.You're an idiot, Marty. Such protocols permit the use of lethal force if such force is reasonably believed necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm. Given that lunatic mob stormed the Capitol and was hunting for politicians to murder, that's a reasonable belief.She was the only one shot because she was the only one who tried to enter. Had she not been shot, the rest of the mob behind her would have followed, just as they had throughout the Capitol. That cop deserves a medal.Of course he was as were the lawmakers behind him. That mob was smashing through the doors and began to enter the Speaker's Lobby. It was his duty to keep them out. He did a fine job as not one single Trump cultist got into the House chamber until all the lawmakers inside were safely escorted out.You're an idiot, Marty. The cop protecting law makers had no idea if she was personally armed or not. He also had no way of knowing if had he let her gain access to the House chamber, the mob wouldn't have followed her.Nothing's been blown out of proportion just because you're a faithful idiot. That woman was a threat to lawmakers when attempted to gain access to where they were hiding.No need for quotations. The fact that they were violent is evidence in the damage and destruction they were doing in order to breach the barricaded doors.A "violent" mob that had armed police officers mingling with it just on the other side of the door, being breached by an unarmed woman.
You're also avoiding the question, probably because you know the answer.
No, just watching you jump through hoops to blow things out of proportion for political gain.
an unarmed woman was a threat....
It was a good shoot. That's why he won't be charged with a crime.
He wasn't in immediate risk, shown by the other cops being interspersed with the protesters on the one side of the door.
What makes me think they know it's a bad shoot is the length of time it's taking to come up with a result of the investigation, and the complete dropping of the matter by the media.
And why hasn't his name been released yet? Any other officer in any other shooting under investigation would have been identified.
By shooting an unarmed woman, pour encouragement les autres.
Don't think that's in the use of deadly force guidelines.
Still not justified via use of deadly force protocols.
Immediate threat, not maybe threat.
What I find strange is the same people who said Colin kappernick was unpatriotic for kneeling during the national anthem are the same unpatriotic Treasonist insurrectionists who murdered a cop in an attempted failed coupOne woman no but she was part of a mob. And she was the first crazy who poked her head in.Fair enough, I didn't use the right language.Actually they have to justify it, that's the whole concept of a "justified use of deadly force"
You getting a hard on over a political enemies death doesn't cut it.
The use of force is justified by the rational threat to the life and safety of the police and their protectees.
She's not my political enemy. She's a tragedy that is the result of years of indoctrination.
One woman hopping through a window, an unarmed woman is not a threat to life and safety.
The cops on the other side of the door in direct contact with the other people sure didn't think so.
Keep justifying it in your addled mind, you soi boi cuck.
How is kamala's dildo doing widening your ass?
Just the fact a cop on duty that day died says the police were justified that day taking lives.You're an idiot, Marty. Such protocols permit the use of lethal force if such force is reasonably believed necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm. Given that lunatic mob stormed the Capitol and was hunting for politicians to murder, that's a reasonable belief.She was the only one shot because she was the only one who tried to enter. Had she not been shot, the rest of the mob behind her would have followed, just as they had throughout the Capitol. That cop deserves a medal.Of course he was as were the lawmakers behind him. That mob was smashing through the doors and began to enter the Speaker's Lobby. It was his duty to keep them out. He did a fine job as not one single Trump cultist got into the House chamber until all the lawmakers inside were safely escorted out.You're an idiot, Marty. The cop protecting law makers had no idea if she was personally armed or not. He also had no way of knowing if had he let her gain access to the House chamber, the mob wouldn't have followed her.Nothing's been blown out of proportion just because you're a faithful idiot. That woman was a threat to lawmakers when attempted to gain access to where they were hiding.No need for quotations. The fact that they were violent is evidence in the damage and destruction they were doing in order to breach the barricaded doors.A "violent" mob that had armed police officers mingling with it just on the other side of the door, being breached by an unarmed woman.
You're also avoiding the question, probably because you know the answer.
No, just watching you jump through hoops to blow things out of proportion for political gain.
an unarmed woman was a threat....
It was a good shoot. That's why he won't be charged with a crime.
He wasn't in immediate risk, shown by the other cops being interspersed with the protesters on the one side of the door.
What makes me think they know it's a bad shoot is the length of time it's taking to come up with a result of the investigation, and the complete dropping of the matter by the media.
And why hasn't his name been released yet? Any other officer in any other shooting under investigation would have been identified.
By shooting an unarmed woman, pour encouragement les autres.
Don't think that's in the use of deadly force guidelines.
Still not justified via use of deadly force protocols.
Truth hurts, soi boi.
This is the same pathology we were discussing before. Your reaction has nothing to do with me being right or wrong. It's that you have such an irrational hatred of me, you can't ever allow me to be right.
Reasonable threat.You're an idiot, Marty. Such protocols permit the use of lethal force if such force is reasonably believed necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm. Given that lunatic mob stormed the Capitol and was hunting for politicians to murder, that's a reasonable belief.She was the only one shot because she was the only one who tried to enter. Had she not been shot, the rest of the mob behind her would have followed, just as they had throughout the Capitol. That cop deserves a medal.Of course he was as were the lawmakers behind him. That mob was smashing through the doors and began to enter the Speaker's Lobby. It was his duty to keep them out. He did a fine job as not one single Trump cultist got into the House chamber until all the lawmakers inside were safely escorted out.You're an idiot, Marty. The cop protecting law makers had no idea if she was personally armed or not. He also had no way of knowing if had he let her gain access to the House chamber, the mob wouldn't have followed her.Nothing's been blown out of proportion just because you're a faithful idiot. That woman was a threat to lawmakers when attempted to gain access to where they were hiding.No need for quotations. The fact that they were violent is evidence in the damage and destruction they were doing in order to breach the barricaded doors.A "violent" mob that had armed police officers mingling with it just on the other side of the door, being breached by an unarmed woman.
You're also avoiding the question, probably because you know the answer.
No, just watching you jump through hoops to blow things out of proportion for political gain.
an unarmed woman was a threat....
It was a good shoot. That's why he won't be charged with a crime.
He wasn't in immediate risk, shown by the other cops being interspersed with the protesters on the one side of the door.
What makes me think they know it's a bad shoot is the length of time it's taking to come up with a result of the investigation, and the complete dropping of the matter by the media.
And why hasn't his name been released yet? Any other officer in any other shooting under investigation would have been identified.
By shooting an unarmed woman, pour encouragement les autres.
Don't think that's in the use of deadly force guidelines.
Still not justified via use of deadly force protocols.
Immediate threat, not maybe threat.
Pathology? It's called observation.
Irrational, but deserved. You are all that is wrong with this country.
