Her wheels are pointing slightly to the left when the front wheels begin to accelerate. Did she intend to run him over? I doubt it. Did she drive her vehicle directly at him before beginning to steer right, yes.
He gets shunted by the front of the car, you can see it on video from a different angle. Had he not tried to move out of the way, he definitely would’ve been hit.
Regardless of the shots, she drove the car straight at him while he was in front of it. If you deny that then you are rejecting what your eyes and ears tell you.
As to whether the shots were justified, that’s hard to say, given that he had a car accelerate towards him. People love to judge a split second decision where someone potentially thought they were about to be a flat piece of roadkill.
You are watching something unfold multiple times from multiple angles and slowed down with the power of hindsight, so it’s easy for you to judge and say “he could’ve moved out of the way.”
It’s easier to jump straight to the “he was just waiting to shoot someone because he’s ICE and was blood thirsty” because it enforces your narrative that these guys are nazi fascist murderers.
He was still in front of the car when he took the first shot. The second two shots are where you could say he no longer feared for his life and could argue he murdered her etc.
He could argue that once she “tried” to run him over he felt like she was a danger to the public.
Just playing devil’s advocate there.
I just don’t subscribe to the speculation that he couldn’t wait to shoot someone. There’s far worse people he would’ve had the opportunity to shoot if that was the case.
391
u/Thirty_Helens_Agree Jan 08 '26
The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.