"Direct result"? How could you argue that they are? Provide proof please.
Because they are more a "Direct result" of the military. That makes more sense.
VID Don Lemon and CNN put on blast
- Thread starter IschKabibble
- Start date
Because they are more a "Direct result" of the military. That makes more sense.
And what was it exactly they intended?
Typical arrogance and deception by national news hosts. Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, etc, etc. They all have an agenda. Honestly, I haven't watched a second of CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, etc in probably 2 years. These stations do nothing but brainwash the public with whatever agenda they're being fed, by whichever political party they're in bed with. Also haven't watched a local news broadcast in years. It's all negative bullshit meant to divide the public, so they have more to report on. The world would be better off without them all.
To kill police officers. In the case of the BR shooter he actually spoke out against BLM for being non violent.
lol. So BLM wasn't extreme enough for him? Okay. Duly noted.
You didn't answer my question. Pretty sure Nation Of Islam is not BLM....
BLM doesn't advocate violence. People showing up at a protest and yelling to kill police officers doesn't change that.
You didn't answer mine either. I don't care to argue circles with you. You're very comfortable with what you believe and I respect that. I'm not trying to change anybody's mind here. Just talking out loud.
From Ismaaiyl Abdullah Brinsley's cell phone, and the march shown was a BLM march, The NY BLM organizers admitted so. So yes that does change things.
There are 2 problem with that logic. 1) sometimes people lose their minds. 2) how many officers were killed in NYC?
Founding and current state are two separate subjects. I don't think I necessarily said the BLM was violent in action, but they are on record for being a part of some violent rhetoric. If you can find where I said that the BLM in itself is violent, I will admit to my mistake, but I stand by my opinion that the group fosters a negative and sometimes violent atmosphere.
1) In the case of Brinsley, his own lawyer(from previous charges), said he had no known psychiatric problems and was not difficult to represent. 2) Two, ambushed in this case. What's your point?
In all fairness the Sherriff was right.
The Post redacted and the statistics are bunk.
Luckily he knew that, but Lemon wouldn't let him elaborate,and as you say, it becomes a screaming match.
Lemon is very skilled in manipulating control of conversations, most notably when he's fucking clueless.
I'm fucking pissed this thread has been derailed from the original intent of clowning Mr. Lemon
I don't recall giving consent for this video.
Sorry bro, it was just the perfect example of my mindset, and it slipped my mind in the heat of posting...won't happen again.
According to some witnesses, Michael Brown DID have his hands up before he was shot. He didn't literally say "hands up don't shoot"... but he turned around and raised his hands up and was shot.
And even if you don't believe those witnesses, here's a new one that survived being shot AFTER putting his hands up.
Unarmed black man... therapist. His client had a toy truck... but he got shot... with his hands up.
Cop should get life in prison for attempted murder.
Miami police shoot unarmed therapist trying to calm autistic patient
Complete fabricated bullshit that you and many many others continue to propagate. No one that states these lies has read Eric Holder's DOJ report, or they just cast it all away because they can't come to terms that the facts don't coincide with their emotions. It's pretty obvious, if there was anyway for Obama and Holder to justify prosecuting Wilson they would have.
Here's the report, you should read it if you haven't. https://www.justice.gov/sites/defau...doj_report_on_shooting_of_michael_brown_1.pdf
This case appears very fucked up and if it went down as is being reported and appears, I hope this officer faces the toughest punishment allowed by Florida law. Thank goodness the counselor survived.
This case in no way proves any facts with the Brown shooting, completely irrelevant and if someone tries to use facts in one case to prove another, well there's clearly no helping the waterheads that would claim such.
I haven't seen that one yet. From what I'm hearing it was completely uncalled for. I will check it out and report back after work.
Complete fabricated bullshit he?
LOL. First off let me school you on something. I don't spew "complete fabricated bullshit". Get that through your head.
I always have a source for what I post.
Here is a video from the scene of the shooting with the witnesses. Maybe watch for yourself, and how you throw the "bullshit" tag around. If you don't want to believe it, that's on you - just say so.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6yfbbt6DvHg
But when I said "this was what witnesses said"... well, proof is in the video -that is what the witnesses said. If after seeing this video you still want to think it's "complete fabricated bullshit"...... feel free.
Yes, and the DOJ addresses all the witnesses in the report. The witnesses that claim the hands up bullshit either changed their stories or retracted their lies and admitted they didn't see the actual shootings and what happened throughout. That's how evidence works in any fair system, witness testimony must be consistent and reliable.
When the Evidence in a DOJ report and actual witness testimony reports prove that what your saying is bullshit, than I will call it bullshit. If you get offended, I'm sorry but I don't care about your feelings.
You can post all the cnn or whatever videos you want, one snippet of video doesn't prove a thing. There were obviously many witnesses much closer with a better view of what was going on, but let's just discount what they say because then the evidence won't fit the case. If only the prosecutors had played that cnn video before the grand jury they could've gotten a true bill.
You clearly are very emotional about the topic and refuse to look at ALL the evidence because you've made up your mind and I suspect you won't waiver from that opinion no matter what evidence you are presented with. It's cool, that's what's great about the USA, we can all have differing opinions and voice those no matter if we actually have a leg to stand on. Fortunately for all of us, the courts are dependent on evidence and not opinion.
Here's actual testimony of "your witnesses" from the video...
Witness 122 is a 46-year-old white male. He was laying drain pipe on Canfield Drive with Witness 130 on the morning of the shooting. Witness 122 gave six statements, including testimony before the county grand jury. SLCPD detectives and an FBI agent twice jointly interviewed him, and SLCPD detectives once independently interviewed him. Witness 122 and Witness 130 authored one-page written statements on advice of a former boss. Witness 122 and Witness 130 claimed that they did not discuss what they witnessed, though Witness 130 admitted that they read each other’s statements after they were written. Witness 122 gave a media interview on the condition of anonymity. As noted throughout this memorandum, federal prosecutors interviewed many potential witnesses in an effort to assess credibility and reconcile internal inconsistencies and inconsistencies with physical evidence, as is necessary to make a fair prosecutive decision. Witness 122 agreed to meet with federal prosecutors only after assurances that he would not be held against his will at the FBI office, claiming that he had heard of instances where individuals go to the FBI office and do not emerge for days.
According to Witness 122, Witness 122 and Witness 130 (collectively, "the contractors") twice encountered Brown during the morning of the shootings, first when Brown was alone and then when Brown was with Witness 101. Witness 122 and Brown did most of the talking, and the topics included God and smoking marijuana. About 20 minutes after their last conversation with Brown, the contractors heard a loud bang. Witness 122 saw Brown running, staggering, or falling forward. Contrary to the autopsy results, Witness 122 described Brown being shot in the back and "knew he had gotten hit." In fact, both contractors claimed to have witnessed bullets go through Brown and exit his back, as evidenced by his shirt "popping back" and "stuff coming through." However, in his interview with federal prosecutors, Witness 122 explained that he thought that Brown was shot in the back and stumbled until he saw media reports about the autopsy commissioned by Brown’s family. After learning about that autopsy, he realized that Brown was not shot in the back and admittedly changed his account.
Witness 122 also claimed that Brown put his right hand to the ground to regain his balance when he was hit and as he turned around. According to both contractors, Brown then turned around with his hands up and repeatedly screamed "Okay!" as many as eight times, an exclamation heard by no other witness. When Witness 122 demonstrated the position of
58
Brown’s hands for federal prosecutors and agents, he wavered from a position of surrender to one indicative of a person trying to maintain balance.
Contrary to the autopsy results establishing that the shot to the top of Brown’s head would have incapacitated Brown almost immediately, both contractors insisted that Brown continued to move toward Wilson as far as 20, 25, or even 30 feet after the final shots. Witness 122 described Brown as walking "dead on his feet, and then he just fell forward." Later, both contractors admitted that they did not actually see Brown fall to the ground, because their view was obstructed by the corner of a building.
Witness 122 insisted that there were three officers present during the shootings, demonstrating the inaccuracy of his perception. Witness 122 described three uniformed police officers engaged with Brown in a "triangle formation" at the time of the shootings. Witness 122 described a heavyset, older officer, and two "skinny, little people," one of whom was possibly a female and the other with dark hair and a moustache, who was a head shorter than the heavyset officer. Witness 122 described the shooter as the heavyset officer. Witness 122 explained that the heavset officer shot until he ran out of bullets, and then the shorter officer with the moustache trained his gun on Brown, but did not shoot. These statements cannot be reconciled with the fact that Wilson was the only officer present when Brown was shot and that Wilson has a slim build.
Witness 122 also explained that he did not see Witness 101 at all during the shooting itself, and did not understand how Witness 101 could claim to see everything if he was hiding behind a car. Witness 122 also said that contrary to what was reported in the media, Brown did not say, "Don’t shoot."
The contractors, apparently unwittingly, were captured on a widely circulated video taken several minutes after the shooting while responding officers were securing the scene with crime scene tape. That video depicts another individual yelling, "He wasn’t no threat at all," as Witness 122 put his hands up and stated, "He had his fucking hands in the air." As detailed below, two other witnesses, Witness 128 and Witness 137, each took credit for making the statement, "He wasn’t no threat at all."24 Both of those witnesses have since acknowledged to federal agents and prosecutors that they did not, in fact, know whether Brown was a threat.
According to the Brown family, Witness 122 called them after the shooting and told them that he had seen Wilson shoot Brown execution-style as Brown was on his knees holding his hands in the air. However, Witness 122 denied making any statements about the nature of the shooting to the Brown family. As mentioned, despite his earlier statements, Witness 122 recanted the claim that he actually saw Brown fall dead to the ground.
Witness 122 has no criminal history. As detailed above, material portions of Witness 122’s accounts are irreconcilable with the physical and forensic evidence. These accounts are also inconsistent with each other and inconsistent with credible witness accounts. Accordingly, after a thorough review of all of the evidence, federal prosecutors determined this witness’s accounts not to be credible and therefore do not support a prosecution of Darren Wilson.
24 The person who recorded this video claimed that yet another person, "Chris," made that statement.
LOL @ 'you are very emotional about the topic".
Nice try.
No, I don't take kindly to being called a liar who is 'fabricating bullshit'.
You're the one who is severely emotional because I actually backed up what I said.
Your claim about it being "complete fabricated bullshit" was debunked. It wasn't bullshit....and even your post shows that.
But you want to pull the emotional card - look in the mirror.
However, if you call me a liar, best believe I will go off on you.
You didn't debunk shit. Your "debunking" is in the form of an edited video. I'm the furthest thing from emotional, I've backed all my opinion with evidence and fact, you've backed your BS with a cnn video. A video that the DOJ report proves that the voices attributed to who CNN claims is saying what is BULLSHIT.
If you don't want to be accused of fabricating bullshit, then don't. It's that simple. You can go off on me all you want, it doesn't change facts of the case and that we clearly have a differing opinion on it. I'm secure enough in my thoughts and opinions that I promise, I "won't go off" on you if you call me or imply anything, I'm a big boy.
