that would factually make you think that something is about to take place

[Tony_M]

Hello.

Source: YouTube, Cleveland Clinic’s Third Face Transplant Patient | Katie Stubblefield, 0:32-0:49.
When Katie Stubblefield was 18, she tried to kill herself with a gun.
Her father told journalists:
That day started out like a lot of days, Katie was finishing up, that was senior year. She was upset, I guess you would say a girlfriend/boyfriend breakup kind of deal. There was nothing in her voice, there was nothing that would factually make you think that something is about to take place.

I don't understand the part in bold.
What is the function of "would"? And why does he need the simple present after "would"?

Thank you.

 

[Tarheel]

Hello.

Source: YouTube, Cleveland Clinic’s Third Face Transplant Patient | Katie Stubblefield, 0:32-0:49.
When Katie Stubblefield was 18, she tried to kill herself with a gun.
Her father told journalists:
That day started out like a lot of days, Katie was finishing up, that was senior year. She was upset, I guess you would say a girlfriend/boyfriend breakup kind of deal. There was nothing in her voice, there was nothing that would factually make you think that something is about to take place.

I don't understand the part in bold.
What is the function of "would"? And why does he need the simple present after "would"?

[....................]

In my opinion it would have made more sense if he had said that there was no reason to think that something was about to take place. I can't tell you why he chose the words he used. I don't even know if he knows that.

 

[Rover_KE]

It seems to me it should say ‘actually’.

 

[emsr2d2]

There was nothing in her voice, there was nothing that would factually make you think that something is about to take place.

I don't understand the part in bold.
What is the function of "would"? And why does he need the simple present after "would"?

He's asking the reader/listener to put themselves in his place and imagine what they would think in that situation. In his opinion, if your daughter were in the same situation and behaving the same way, you would not think "Ohhh, something [bad] is about to take place".

 

[Tony_M]

He's asking the reader/listener to put themselves in his place and imagine what they would think in that situation.

Thank you, @emsr2d2.
He's talking about the past. I thought "would've + III form or -ed" should be used in such situations.

- [If you you'd been in place], nothing would've made you think that something was about to happen.

 

[emsr2d2]

No. He's not suggesting you put yourself exactly in his place (where he was in the past). He's asking you to imagine a future in which you find yourself in the same situation.

 

[Tony_M]

No. He's not suggesting you put yourself exactly in his place (where he was in the past). He's asking you to imagine a future in which you find yourself in the same situation.

Sorry, I'm not getting there.

 

[jutfrank]

It should be 'were', not 'is'.