Forensic Expert Confirms; Heather Heyer Was NOT Murdered

Untrue.
Must I truly go back and show where you inserted yourself into my reply to someone else who suggested the 30-36 mph.

You are simply nitpicking. I get it, you posted videos to "refute" some other guy who said 35 MPH.

Watch the fricking video. Just fricking watch it and stop. Seriously. There is enough there you can see that she wasn't on the hood of the gray car when it was hit. I also think the car was going faster than 35, but hey, I can't judge that from the video. I'm only telling you what I see from the evidence.
 
No, I am telling you to watch the video frame by frame and believe what you see rather than believe your "feels".

I don't think the guy planned it, I just saw that she was most definitely thrown to the top of that vehicle from a speeding car hitting the car she was thrown onto. I have no idea how fast it was going, only that it was fast enough to throw her to the top of the vehicle which then was pushed into another vehicle and she slid to the hood from there. I either believe what I see or there really is no purpose to this thing called a brain in my head...

She didn't jump there, dude, nor was she on the vehicle when he first hit the gas (likely in a panic, not the brightest bulb on the Hannukah Tree...)

Well there is that disturbing little tidbit, that not only can you not see her before she's on the trunk of the ragtop; but you can't see him hit her either.
So how do you know where she was?
Do you have a video or even a picture of her standing in front of his car?
 
Well there is that disturbing little tidbit, that not only can you not see her before she's on the trunk of the ragtop; but you can't see him hit her either.
So how do you know where she was?
Do you have a video or even a picture of her standing in front of his car?

I know where she wasn't. And that was on the hood of the gray car like the OP article claimed. I also know that she didn't fall from a helicopter to the top of the gray car, that it happened after the car was hit by his, where she landed and how she got to the hood.

My guess is at some point we'll see even more video that will set it more clearly. You asked how she got to the hood of the black car, I'm not so sure that's where she was but it is a good theory, and I gave you my theory. So far your theory is that I should ignore video evidence and pretend that she just magically appeared on top of the gray car...
 
You are simply nitpicking. I get it, you posted videos to "refute" some other guy who said 35 MPH.

Watch the fricking video. Just fricking watch it and stop. Seriously. There is enough there you can see that she wasn't on the hood of the gray car when it was hit. I also think the car was going faster than 35, but hey, I can't judge that from the video. I'm only telling you what I see from the evidence.

I"M THE ONE NITPICKING!!
Damn, that was rich in irony.

Between the two of us, it seems that I'm the only one who's willing to see what both sides have to present and wait to see the outcome; because at no time have I said he was guilty or not guilty.

Whereas you seem to have decided to jump on the liberal bandwagon and just say, "to hell" with anything and everything that I don't agree with.

Make sure you shake hands with Buckly, Domer, Desh, and the rest of the JPP liberals, when you all sit around and pat yourselves on the back.
Just make sure that no one triggers any of you, by reminding you guys about the preconceived ideas about Zimmerman and Wilson. :good4u:
 
I know where she wasn't. And that was on the hood of the gray car like the OP article claimed. I also know that she didn't fall from a helicopter to the top of the gray car, that it happened after the car was hit by his, where she landed and how she got to the hood.

My guess is at some point we'll see even more video that will set it more clearly. You asked how she got to the hood of the black car, I'm not so sure that's where she was but it is a good theory, and I gave you my theory. So far your theory is that I should ignore video evidence and pretend that she just magically appeared on top of the gray car...

Untrue; because my "theory" is that way to many people just want to go with what feels good and will listen to nothing that interferes with what they've determined to be the only outcome.

Aren't you now going to declare that I'm a Nazi, like your buddies have?
 
I"M THE ONE NITPICKING!!
Damn, that was rich in irony.

Yes. You keep focusing on the 35 MPH, minutiae. Which isn't something I claimed. I assumed (yeah, assuming) you were claiming it from your videos of a kid and a kid sized dummy getting hit by cars going at 35.

Between the two of us, it seems that I'm the only one who's willing to see what both sides have to present and wait to see the outcome; because at no time have I said he was guilty or not guilty.
I have no idea of he is guilty. I only know that the original article in this thread is nonsense. The video proves that nonsense wrong.

Whereas you seem to have decided to jump on the liberal bandwagon and just say, "to hell" with anything and everything that I don't agree with.

Make sure you shake hands with Buckly, Domer, Desh, and the rest of the JPP liberals, when you all sit around and pat yourselves on the back.
Just make sure that no one triggers any of you, by reminding you guys about the preconceived ideas about Zimmerman and Wilson. :good4u:

No, I simply told you to use that gray matter in your head, watch the video, and come up with some theory that gets her to the top of that car without the black car's help. I'm waiting.
 
Untrue; because my "theory" is that way to many people just want to go with what feels good and will listen to nothing that interferes with what they've determined to be the only outcome.

Aren't you now going to declare that I'm a Nazi, like your buddies have?

Instead of a theory you give me more "feels" argument? I'm sorry the leftists hurt your "feels"... My "buddies"? What is freaking wrong with you? Seriously.
 
Yes. You keep focusing on the 35 MPH, minutiae. Which isn't something I claimed. I assumed (yeah, assuming) you were claiming it from your videos of a kid and a kid sized dummy getting hit by cars going at 35.

So you just simply ignored that it was "suggested" by someone else and made the choice to focus on that. :good4u:

I have no idea of he is guilty. I only know that the original article in this thread is nonsense. The video proves that nonsense wrong.

The video that also doesn't "prove" what everyone else has been saying; but HEY, why should that be paid attention to. "palm"

No, I simply told you to use that gray matter in your head, watch the video, and come up with some theory that gets her to the top of that car without the black car's help. I'm waiting.

And I simply provided information that allows what you want to believe, to be doubted.

If further evidence comes forward that shows he is guilty as charged, then let him fry; but you seem to be unable to accept the inverse.
So sad
 
So you just simply ignored that it was "suggested" by someone else and made the choice to focus on that. :good4u:
No, the focus was from you. As I said, to me that is minutiae.


The video that also doesn't "prove" what everyone else has been saying; but HEY, why should that be paid attention to. "palm"
But it does prove the article in the OP to be false.


And I simply provided information that allows what you want to believe, to be doubted.

If further evidence comes forward that shows he is guilty as charged, then let him fry; but you seem to be unable to accept the inverse.
So sad
Um. No. Again, Your video was what I was showing to be false by pointing to the actual video. She was thrown to the top of that car and it wasn't by invisible ninjas, it was because of the car striking the other vehicle.

Unless you got a better theory as to how she got thrown on top of that car at that very moment, all you have is your "feels" and "angrified poutrage" over being called names by my supposed "buddies".

At this moment you are just being a sad snowflake screaming about your hurt "feels" while ignoring available information.
 
So you just simply ignored that it was "suggested" by someone else and made the choice to focus on that. :good4u:



The video that also doesn't "prove" what everyone else has been saying; but HEY, why should that be paid attention to. "palm"



And I simply provided information that allows what you want to believe, to be doubted.

If further evidence comes forward that shows he is guilty as charged, then let him fry; but you seem to be unable to accept the inverse.
So sad

She must have jumped, huh?
The fine young Nazi couldn't have killed her?...
You could do better.
You are not trying nearly hard enough.
 
Instead of a theory you give me more "feels" argument? I'm sorry the leftists hurt your "feels"... My "buddies"? What is freaking wrong with you? Seriously.

I offered no "feels" and never asked anyone to disprove what I was showing, until you were triggered and wanted something definitive; with providing definitive your own self.

I'm sorry that you've had to finally accept that you might not always be right.

Yep they're your buddies; so embrace them and feel all tingly.
 
I offered no "feels" and never asked anyone to disprove what I was showing, until you were triggered and wanted something definitive; with providing definitive your own self.

I'm sorry that you've had to finally accept that you might not always be right.

Yep they're your buddies; so embrace them and feel all tingly.

Yes, you did. Your entire "argument" in the post I quoted there was that some people called you names, hurt your "feels" and that they were suddenly my "buddies" because I actually was honest about what I saw, it was the entire post.

Watch the video, and come up with a better theory and convince me or go away. You are not even close to being about to speak factually about this, snowflake.
 
No, the focus was from you. As I said, to me that is minutiae.

I see you're still unable to acknowledge that I was responding to what someone else posted; but then, in liberal world anything that goes against the grain of your beliefs need to be considered the other person "focusing. :good4u:

But it does prove the article in the OP to be false.

Then argue that with the one who posted the op, instead of "focusing" on my reply to someone else.

Um. No. Again, Your video was what I was showing to be false by pointing to the actual video. She was thrown to the top of that car and it wasn't by invisible ninjas, it was because of the car striking the other vehicle.

Since you have nothing but your feels, to suggest how she was thrown; may I ask how my video's were "false"
You might want to ask yourself how she got on his car, as you've suggested, without just closing your mind.

Unless you got a better theory as to how she got thrown on top of that car at that very moment, all you have is your "feels" and "angrified poutrage" over being called names by my supposed "buddies".

Proof that you've got nothing; because your reference to "feels and angrified poutrage", are just your opinion.
Saying that they're your buddies, is an obvious conclusion; based solely on your desire to be correct. :D

At this moment you are just being a sad snowflake screaming about your hurt "feels" while ignoring available information.

And now you've gone full blown liberal, by projecting your own behavior on someone who doesn't totally accept what you present.

So sad
 
Back
Top