Biden Runs Down And Murdered Teen...

[Sparko]

CNN: https://www.cnn.com/2022/09/22/us/no...ide/index.html
Washington Post: https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...db6_story.html

Nothing from MSNBC or NY Times.

[rogue06]

CNN: https://www.cnn.com/2022/09/22/us/no...ide/index.html
Washington Post: https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...db6_story.html

Nothing from MSNBC or NY Times.

Googling it I'm not even seeing that. Pretty much Fox News and locals

c8c02d82-980e-42d0-a619-645493181eb7.jpg
f1b36db7-e592-40f6-9767-ef4f000fce76.jpg

[Ronson]

Googling it I'm not even seeing that. Pretty much Fox News and locals

c8c02d82-980e-42d0-a619-645493181eb7.jpg
f1b36db7-e592-40f6-9767-ef4f000fce76.jpg

Perhaps Google is pushing down the hits?

[seer]

Perhaps Google is pushing down the hits?

That would never happen!

[CivilDiscourse]

I did see an article from the Daily Beast of all places.

[rogue06]

Bing News included the New York Post and ABC.

If this had been a conservative killing a liberal teen over politics, there would be no need to hunt for the story.

[rogue06]

I just went back and looked. Both Paul and Boucher (the neighbor) said it was a property dispute. Boucher claimed Paul was blowing dead leaves onto his property.

Can you link to that for me, because I can't find where Paul said that -- just that's what the attacker claimed and comments like this in the WaPo "What prompted the Nov. 3 assault is still in some dispute"

The closest I see Paul coming to agreeing is this in Reuters

“We need to send a clear message that violence is not the answer — anytime, anywhere,” Paul wrote on social network Twitter on Wednesday evening. “We can hold different views, whether it’s politics, religion or day-to-day matters.”

[Ronson]

Can you link to that for me, because I can't find where Paul said that -- just that's what the attacker claimed and comments like this in the WaPo "What prompted the Nov. 3 assault is still in some dispute"

Paraphrased here. They do say that the leaf pile was "near" his property, so they could have blown over a couple of yards.

The closest I see Paul coming to agreeing is this in Reuters

“We need to send a clear message that violence is not the answer — anytime, anywhere,” Paul wrote on social network Twitter on Wednesday evening. “We can hold different views, whether it’s politics, religion or day-to-day matters.”

I know Paul mentioned it in his newsletters, emails that I subscribe to but don't save. Of course, Paul is speculating on motive and can only go by what Boucher claims.

[rogue06]

Paraphrased here. They do say that the leaf pile was "near" his property, so they could have blown over a couple of yards.

I know Paul mentioned it in his newsletters, emails that I subscribe to but don't save. Of course, Paul is speculating on motive and can only go by what Boucher claims.

Yeah, I heard that the neighbor had been mostly upset that Paul grew pumpkins and composted on his property, but I also heard that he lived diagonally across the street so blowing leaves into his lawn with a mower seems to be an incredible stretch.

It would appear that his lawyer told him he would be in a lot less trouble if he claimed the motive was over their past disagreements over their lawns and not politically motivated.

[CivilDiscourse]

Paraphrased here. They do say that the leaf pile was "near" his property, so they could have blown over a couple of yards.

I know Paul mentioned it in his newsletters, emails that I subscribe to but don't save. Of course, Paul is speculating on motive and can only go by what Boucher claims.

Source: https://www.vox.com/2018/6/12/17453976/rand-paul-assault-rene-boucher-neighbors-dispute-pile-of-brush

Sen. Rand Paul’s office dismissed the characterization of an ongoing “yard dispute,” saying in a statement that any such description “justifies such violence and misses the point.”

“Before Senator Paul was violently attacked from behind, he had no conversations or discussions with the attacker,” Sergio Gor, the deputy chief of staff for Paul said in a statement. “There was no ’longstanding dispute.’ This description is untrue. It is impossible to have a dispute when no words of disagreement were ever spoken — neither immediately nor at any other time before the attack occurred. In the decade prior to the attack, Senator Paul had no contact with the attacker.”

© Copyright Original Source

[Ronson]

Yeah, I heard that the neighbor had been mostly upset that Paul grew pumpkins and composted on his property, but I also heard that he lived diagonally across the street so blowing leaves into his lawn with a mower seems to be an incredible stretch.

It would appear that his lawyer told him he would be in a lot less trouble if he claimed the motive was over their past disagreements over their lawns and not politically motivated.

Source: https://www.vox.com/2018/6/12/17453976/rand-paul-assault-rene-boucher-neighbors-dispute-pile-of-brush

Sen. Rand Paul’s office dismissed the characterization of an ongoing “yard dispute,” saying in a statement that any such description “justifies such violence and misses the point.”

“Before Senator Paul was violently attacked from behind, he had no conversations or discussions with the attacker,” Sergio Gor, the deputy chief of staff for Paul said in a statement. “There was no ’longstanding dispute.’ This description is untrue. It is impossible to have a dispute when no words of disagreement were ever spoken — neither immediately nor at any other time before the attack occurred. In the decade prior to the attack, Senator Paul had no contact with the attacker.”

© Copyright Original Source

The reason I believe Boucher's gripe was indeed about leaves (or property in general) is that this sort of thing sets people off nearly as often as road rage. Just Google "neighbor shootings" and I'm sure you can find plenty of examples. It gets really personal when you think a neighbor is devaluing your property by their actions. I once had someone move in next to me and started a pig farm! You ever smell one of those? My visitors would come over and gag; I could only imagine trying to sell my home under such circumstances. I never confronted the guy - I went to the county and filed a nuisance complaint. The fact that Boucher never confronted Paul is not surprising. People are uncomfortable getting face-to-face so they sit and stew, until they finally erupt.

If it was about politics then I would suspect Paul voted on something controversial shortly before the attack, and/or Boucher had a history of political activism. I don't recall either being an issue.

So, with due respect to Occam's razor, all indications are that Boucher was an incensed neighbor.

[rogue06]

The reason I believe Boucher's gripe was indeed about leaves (or property in general) is that this sort of thing sets people off nearly as often as road rage. Just Google "neighbor shootings" and I'm sure you can find plenty of examples. It gets really personal when you think a neighbor is devaluing your property by their actions. I once had someone move in next to me and started a pig farm! You ever smell one of those? My visitors would come over and gag; I could only imagine trying to sell my home under such circumstances. I never confronted the guy - I went to the county and filed a nuisance complaint. The fact that Boucher never confronted Paul is not surprising. People are uncomfortable getting face-to-face so they sit and stew, until they finally erupt.

If it was about politics then I would suspect Paul voted on something controversial shortly before the attack, and/or Boucher had a history of political activism. I don't recall either being an issue.

So, with due respect to Occam's razor, all indications are that Boucher was an incensed neighbor.

It looks like his story changed from leaves being blown into his yard to complaints about the "unsightly" compost pile that Boucher admits to having set on fire but complained that Paul kept adding on to it.

So it looks like he or his lawyers realized the leaf story would collapse under any sort of cross-examination and settled on this instead.

Never a good sign when someone changes his story regarding motivation.

Further, according to a mutual friend and former city commissioner, Jim Bullington, the men are political opposites and have had “heated discussions” about health care in the past. I'll note that a couple of months before the assault Republicans repealed a small portion of Obamacare.

So...

If Paul is correct about there not any ongoing dispute between them over their lawns -- or at least none he was aware of...

And Bullington is correct that the two of them had "heated discussions" over politics (although he doesn't say when) -- particularly health care...

And when you consider that Republicans had recently repealed a part of Obamacare -- and were still working at repealing other portions as well as the entire thing...

If you add the fact that Boucher's lawyer worked very hard to keep Boucher's political views off-limits at his trial^[1]...

It is starting to look like the lawn dispute (which changed in nature over time) might not be the reason and that a strong case can be made for it being political




1. if the DA accepted the claim it was the result of a property dispute, then Boucher's political views should be off-limits. Just like Paul's views shouldn't come into play in such a dispute. But the very fact that the lawyer was concerned that Boucher's political views might prejudice potential jurors against him indicates that Boucher has expressed some of his political opinions rather strongly in the past. I did note previously how his facebook account showed strong pro-occupy support and anti-Trump opinions.

[Ronson]

It looks like his story changed from leaves being blown into his yard to complaints about the "unsightly" compost pile that Boucher admits to having set on fire but complained that Paul kept adding on to it.

So it looks like he or his lawyers realized the leaf story would collapse under any sort of cross-examination and settled on this instead.

Never a good sign when someone changes his story regarding motivation.

Still a property issue. It wouldn't surprise me that an attorney might tweak it to play better in court.

Further, according to a mutual friend and former city commissioner, Jim Bullington, the men are political opposites and have had “heated discussions” about health care in the past. I'll note that a couple of months before the assault Republicans repealed a small portion of Obamacare.

According to Paul, he had never even spoken to Boucher before. Zero contact.

So...

If Paul is correct about there not any ongoing dispute between them over their lawns -- or at least none he was aware of...

And Bullington is correct that the two of them had "heated discussions" over politics (although he doesn't say when) -- particularly health care...

And when you consider that Republicans had recently repealed a part of Obamacare -- and were still working at repealing other portions as well as the entire thing...

If you add the fact that Boucher's lawyer worked very hard to keep Boucher's political views off-limits at his trial^[1]...

It is starting to look like the lawn dispute (which changed in nature over time) might not be the reason and that a strong case can be made for it being political

It still seems like the most likely story to me. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree,

1. if the DA accepted the claim it was the result of a property dispute, then Boucher's political views should be off-limits. Just like Paul's views shouldn't come into play in such a dispute. But the very fact that the lawyer was concerned that Boucher's political views might prejudice potential jurors against him indicates that Boucher has expressed some of his political opinions rather strongly in the past. I did note previously how his facebook account showed strong pro-occupy support and anti-Trump opinions.

It wouldn't surprise me if Boucher was a Democrat, and that certainly would add to his animosity. I just don't believe that in-and-of itself would set him off - especially going into a violent rage. The property thing would.


ETA: If Paul and Boucher ever had "heated discussions" about politics then I'm sure Paul would have mentioned it as a possible motive.

[Gondwanaland]

Googling it I'm not even seeing that. Pretty much Fox News and locals

c8c02d82-980e-42d0-a619-645493181eb7.jpg
f1b36db7-e592-40f6-9767-ef4f000fce76.jpg

Perhaps could be your personalized results. Or the term you chose to search

CNN, WaPo, NYP, and even Daily Beast all pop up on my first page of Google search results.

[rogue06]

Still a property issue. It wouldn't surprise me that an attorney might tweak it to play better in court.

Of course they wanted it to be a case resulting from a property dispute. If Boucher were to admit it was over politics he would be in much more serious trouble.

As it was he spent several months in jail followed by home confinement and having to sell his house to pay the court and Paul (he owed over $800,000)

But the fact that it went from initial claims of leaves blowing in his yard which upset him but got dropped as the reason for the attack in favor over being upset over a compost heap which would be hard to demonstrate wasn't the case -- except for the fact Boucher initially kept claiming it was over leaves.

As I said when someone is forced to alter their motivation, red flags start popping up.

According to Paul, he had never even spoken to Boucher before. Zero contact.

Um...

In the decade prior to the attack, Senator Paul had no contact with the attacker.

That looks like not recall any recent contact -- the last 10 years. 10 years previously would have been not long after the passage of Obamacare.

It still seems like the most likely story to me. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree

No prob. Not like I have a dog in this fight.

But IMHBAO the needed to be altered lawn dispute motive isn't what holds up.

It wouldn't surprise me if Boucher was a Democrat, and that certainly would add to his animosity. I just don't believe that in-and-of itself would set him off - especially going into a violent rage. The property thing would.

What would be the first clue...

His Facebook postings supporting the far left Occupy movement (a.k.a., antifa lite)?

Or the fact his attorney was quite concerned about keeping Boucher's political opinions off-limits during the trial.

Looks like he was more than just a Democrat but one of those occupying the fringe.

ETA: If Paul and Boucher ever had "heated discussions" about politics then I'm sure Paul would have mentioned it as a possible motive.

If Paul was responding to being asked about arguments over his lawn...