davyjones

Dude, I think Minneapolis may be the most unsafe place in this country for goats, if you catch my drift.

If he were actually principled he’d name the principals in the matter.

:lol: And exactly what is this loser doing in this social media post?

quote:

---

Americans also mostly back congressional oversight in case President Trump sends the military to fight with the U.S.’s perceived foreign enemies. Another 70 percent of respondents said Congress should have to approve the president’s war request, with 95 percent of Democrats, 78 percent of independents and 54 percent of Republicans in agreement on this.

---

And where does the American approval rating of Congress stand? So according to this poll, Americans suddenly trust a Congress with the historically low approval rating with oversight of critical issues and situations? What a load of garbage.

Lol

None of that matters, it’s a matter of whether a reasonable officer/agent would have, in the moment, perceived an imminent threat of death or great bodily injury to self or others, given the totality of the circumstances, without the use of hindsight.

That’s the general legal standard as to whether the officer/agent was justified in his or her use of force in the particular situation. It’s not that hard. I wouldn’t think you have to be a criminal law attorney to grasp this, but I’m starting to question my prior beliefs in that regard. There are some very terse yet critical key terms/phrases/concepts therein. “In the moment”; “totality of the circumstances”; and “without the use of hindsight” are the ones that, if pressed, I personally would pick out as the “most” consequential, but that’s JMO. The entire passage and each of its elements are rather weighty.

Blah blah blah. When certain people say anything about anything it triggers an immediate and automatic hissing of opposition and outrage….typically in strangely simplistic terms. It’s usually more likely about the disliked person than about the actual subject matter, hence the usual lead with some sort of contemptuous description of or rant about said person. In this instance, “Sen- Sai Hannity”.

“Let’s say you don’t find anything” could technically be a reason to decline to investigate any suspected or possible crime, I suppose. Probably not a good policy to go by.

**I didn’t DV you, by the way. That ain’t exactly how I operate.

Nice guys finish last. There’s a lot of truth to that.

“Invasion”?? Bro this is gonna be, what are we up to now, WW5? (According to some, lol)