Al Sharpton to meet with Obama over Ferguson

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

I think you're all missing my point.

perhaps you've reached the point where you are the only one capable of understanding your nonsense?

[buckman]

What evidence do you have that the process was sloppy and careless?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Sea Dangles]

Spence is part black I think. I mean,look at the chair he is getting rid of.... The fact he lives with his family is just a disguise.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Fly Rod]

Originally Posted by spence

I think you're all missing my point.

If anyone is missing the point ...UR

To seek justice doesn't mean you necessarily seek a conviction,


Sorry Spence they want a conviction.



it means you want the system to work for you. Given how sloppy and careless the process appears to have been I can see why many don't believe justice was done.

Sloppy and careless...U had the FBI, your president and Holder looking for a conviction....did U C your presidents face on TV after the grand jury did not convict?

Neither Holder or Obama should have been in Ferguson.

[Fly Rod]

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/dam...000/ar-BBghnYt

[Raider Ronnie]

Originally Posted by Fly Rod

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/dam...000/ar-BBghnYt

Who the hell would rebuild there ?
You got to feel bad for the black woman that had the store baking cakes & cookies.
Started with nothing, worked hard and built a successful business.
the complete oposite of the "it's not my fault" " I need a handout" scum that lit the fires.
She should take whatever donations given to her ( last report I saw it was up over 100k) and move the hell away from there.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

I think you're all missing my point.

It's not that your point was missed, it's that it was not getting anywhere. The responses were attempts to get somewhere.

That is a perspective from which many are looking at this situation and in many ways it's a valid perspective.

Perspective is self-validating. It is good to observe, even understand, different perspectives, but without agreement on observable "facts," perspective cannot meaningfully function beyond those who hold it. In and of itself, it has no useful function in the larger society. It doesn't get anywhere.

That doesn't mean there are other perspectives or that it's a complete perspective.

Exactly. There are other perspectives. And competing perspectives, arguing strictly on the a priori validation which each perspective gives itself, debate without direction and get nowhere. A complete perspective, as you put it, would be an agreement of perspectives based upon objective observation. It is that agreement which would become law. And law cannot function if it argues against itself. A victorious imposition of a given perspective upon the law destroys the law and, therefor, society.

To seek justice doesn't mean you necessarily seek a conviction, it means you want the system to work for you. Given how sloppy and careless the process appears to have been I can see why many don't believe justice was done.

To "seek justice" can be a very sloppy phrase if the seeking is based on personal or group perspective rather than law. If the "you" for whom the system must work is a group and its particular perspective rather than all of society, then the "complete perspective," the law, is broken, and where we get to, where it goes, is the destruction (transformation) of society.

And when this "justice" sought for a group is based not on legal justice but on perceived historical grievance, then the particular case, Ferguson in this instance, is not about the observable facts and the concluding justice by law, rather the case is merely another springboard for furthering a group perspective. And when such a sought after justice is fueled by ideologues who's intention is to alter society for the benefit of a particular perspective and the group that holds it, then even the "community" is swept up beyond its local perspective and subsumed into a supposed monolithic structure of lockstep black communities. Such a monolith is, on its face, a fictional false one. There is great diversity in the supposed monolith, and the observable facts are that those within it who walk in more independent shoes following values of self-reliance, work ethic, so-called traditional American values, succeed on a far greater scale than those who subscribe to the ideological perspective of the Sharptons and their destructive get nowhere agenda.

[FishermanTim]

Maybe Big "O" will have a beer-gate meeting with him?

Remember Henry Gates?
Remember the WHITE police officer that was the center of questioning his handling the BLACK man's attempt to break into his house?

Or more soundly, the "witness" that called the police (a close friend of mine) who was thrown under the bus by the whoring media and left to answer death threats and violent phone calls all by herself?

This is just a travesty, an utter disgrace that someone who's only contribution to the world is that he was able to set his own race's advancements back 50 years, that he is having a special meeting with the prez.

This also goes to more directly define the character (or lack of) of Obama.

Boy, I'm glad I haven't voted D in decades!!!!!

[buckman]

The process worked perfectly.
The prosecutor's job is to help the grand jury decide the truth not to get a conviction.
The truth came out
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Fly Rod]

Originally Posted by buckman

The process worked perfectly.
The prosecutor's job is to help the grand jury decide the truth not to get a conviction.
The truth came out
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Amen

[Fly Rod]

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/...dia/ar-BBgio9c

[buckman]

Now in New York ....
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jackbass]

The testimony and case is 100% available on the NYT website. 63 witnesses and the grand Jury could not indict the cop.

Is it possible Brown was just an a hole? I don't know just sick of the effing BS. No one makes excuses for me. No al sharptons coming to my defense if I attack a cop and get killed because of it. Sorry these people including the president need to stop sugar coating and making excuses for people. I don't hate. I don't do anything racially motivated I am friends with all people. What happened in ferguson seems pretty cut and dry to me and I have read a lot of the testimony. Much of the investigation was conducted by the FBI not local authorities.
Certainly there were witnesses that stated they saw Wilson shoot brown while he was kneeling. One was "mike Browns best friend" there were also witnesses that stated they had received pressure from the community to not testify to the facts. One individual came forward to say he had been told not to testify by individuals in the community. But he couldn't let an Innocent man be found guilty(Wilson).
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

Supposedly he met with Reagan too....just didn't find a pic. Its just photo posturing.....

As scottw said, inviting the guy to the White House to ask his advice on an urgent situation, isn't exactly a photo op. I heard Sharpton has been to the White House 82 times since Obama was elected. No idea if that's true. I have no reason to doubt it,given the company that our President has historically kept. Unbelievable that anyone who sat in Rev Wright's church for decades could get elected POTUS...

[spence]

Originally Posted by buckman

The process worked perfectly.
The prosecutor's job is to help the grand jury decide the truth not to get a conviction.
The truth came out
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The job of the prosecutor is to present the information they choose to the grand jury so they can determine probable cause.

In the Ferguson case they assigned a prosecutor with a long history of bias towards the police. The long rambling defense of Wilson was bizarre and only reinforced that belief.

It wouldn't surprise me if the DOJ moves to keep local prosecutors from handling cases like this to ensure the integrity of the process is maintained.

The New York announcement this week was stunning.

[PaulS]

Wait until Jim sees Ben Carson comparing the US to Nazi Germany. He is going to be bringing that up for the next 10 years.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by PaulS

Wait until Jim sees Ben Carson comparing the US to Nazi Germany. He is going to be bring that up for the 10 years.

Jim . . . PLEASE, PLEASE, don't respond to this.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jackbass

Is it possible Brown was just an a hole?

Given the video of him intimidating the store clerk it's safe to assume he had a streak.

Have you actually read the transcript of Wilson's account? It doesn't make Brown out to be a jerk, he paints a picture of a crazed person with a death wish. It's almost hard to believe.

[spence]

Originally Posted by buckman

What evidence do you have that the process was sloppy and careless?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It's all in the grand jury documents released. Multiple instances of failure to follow processes, potential influencing of witnesses, destruction of evidence, lack of evidence collection etc...

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Given the video of him intimidating the store clerk it's safe to assume he had a streak.

Have you actually read the transcript of Wilson's account? It doesn't make Brown out to be a jerk, he paints a picture of a crazed person with a death wish. It's almost hard to believe.

The good news is, in this country, we don't send defendents to jail just because you don't buy their version of the story. The burden is much higher, as it should be.

You don't get to struggle with police, you just don't. You put your hands up and submit, and THEN you get to take advantage of all the protections that our system provides.

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Jim . . . PLEASE, PLEASE, don't respond to this.

Jim in CT - "This is why it is different. Yada, Yada, Liberalism, Yada"

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

The New York announcement this week was stunning.

Less expected than the Ferguson verdict.

Again, the deceased swattd ta th ecops as they tried to handcuff him. NO ONE deserves to die for that, but does anyone believe this guy would be dead if he let the cops do what they tried to do? I didn't see cops on a death hunt in this video, I saw cops approaching this guy with lots of caution and reserve. It escalated AFTER the deceased refused to let the cops handcuff him, and once again, you don't get to do that.

[Jackbass]

Originally Posted by spence

Given the video of him intimidating the store clerk it's safe to assume he had a streak.

Have you actually read the transcript of Wilson's account? It doesn't make Brown out to be a jerk, he paints a picture of a crazed person with a death wish. It's almost hard to believe.

I purposely avoided his testimony. My preference was to read testimony of individuals with no perceived "dog in the fight" if you will.

To be honest I feel the case is jaded in hysteria. Many of the witnesses stated as soon as it all happened people who did not witness the event were stating "he shot him for no reason" "he was on his knees"

I agree the NY case is shocking that one I feel should have brought a charge, particularly given video evidence of the event. With the number of officers on the scene, one individual seemingly chose to take action. I am glad the federal government is looking into that one
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

The job of the prosecutor is to present the information they choose to the grand jury so they can determine probable cause.

THe grand jury is not a mere sponge that only soaks up the information presented by the prosecutor. Grand jury members can ask questions and demand evidence.

In the Ferguson case they assigned a prosecutor with a long history of bias towards the police.

Who be "They"? Since prosecutors, for the most part, prosecute the case brought by police, you'ld think that, yeah, their "bias" was be toward the police. And in most cases, when charges are brought against police, the police, in trial by jury, are usually found justified. This, in sum. would create "a long history of bias towards the police." Perhaps, you could mention some of the vast number of prosecutors that "they" could have assigned who don't have a built in "bias" toward the police

The long rambling defense of Wilson was bizarre and only reinforced that belief.

In contrast to the usual, the grand jury trial transcript was made public, so the WHOLE proceeding, including all the evidence is there, not just your characterization of a "long rambling defense."

It wouldn't surprise me if the DOJ moves to keep local prosecutors from handling cases like this to ensure the integrity of the process is maintained.

It wouldn't surprise me either. It wouldn't surprise me if this DOJ would like to nationalize all criminal cases, especially those involving race, to "ensure the integrity of the process." Never mind that the DOJ is not a shining example of integrity. Never mind that centralization of power is what would most likely ensure corruption of the process since it would be unchallenged.

It would not surprise me if this, as well as all preceding progressive administrations did, would continue to make moves which transfer the power of the States to the Federal Government. It wouldn't surprise me if the trajectory of the States becoming agents of the Federal Government continues, and, eventually the States will be dissolved as sovereign entities becoming merely geographic locations on the map of one, unified, State.

The New York announcement this week was stunning.

Why stunning? I am not influenced in this matter by media bias. I don't know what evidence the grand jury heard. If there was some intentional corruption in the process, it would be one of the duties of the free press to expose that.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

Given the video of him intimidating the store clerk it's safe to assume he had a streak.

Have you actually read the transcript of Wilson's account? It doesn't make Brown out to be a jerk, he paints a picture of a crazed person with a death wish. It's almost hard to believe.

Was Wilson trying to make Brown out to be a "jerk"? Did the video make him out to be a jerk. A jerk can be offensive, but that does not make him a criminal. The video shows Brown to be a criminal. A lawbreaker, not a jerk. His actions against Wilson were criminal, not the actions of a jerk. Nor, as far as I've read, did Wilson say that Brown looked like he had a death wish. I don't think that kind of wish could be detected in facial expressions. You inserted that to intensify your depiction. Maybe just your perspective?

But, gee, doesn't Wilson have a right to his perspective. I thought you were a proponent of perspectives?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

Jim in CT - "This is why it is different. Yada, Yada, Liberalism, Yada"

Carson' statement (unless he was borrowing my tactic of using hyperbole, and it appears that is not the case) is absurd.

Carson did state that in the Obama era, people are afraid to say what they feel, and I think a greayt case can be made for that. Anyone who questions the liberal agenda is cast as a racist, bigoted, sexist, homophobic hatemonger. I don't see how anyone can disagree with that. Is that the same thing as sending me to a chlorine shower? No. Does it carry the odor of light facism? Yes.

Good enough?

[spence]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Was Wilson trying to make Brown out to be a "jerk"? Did the video make him out to be a jerk. A jerk can be offensive, but that does not make him a criminal. The video shows Brown to be a criminal. A lawbreaker, not a jerk. His actions against Wilson were criminal, not the actions of a jerk. Nor, as far as I've read, did Wilson say that Brown looked like he had a death wish. I don't think that kind of wish could be detected in facial expressions. You inserted that to intensify your depiction. Maybe just your perspective?

But, gee, doesn't Wilson have a right to his perspective. I thought you were a proponent of perspectives?

A lot of good kids steal stuff, doesn't make it right but his behavior towards the clerk shows his attitude.

There's a big gap between intimidating a store clerk and attacking a uniformed officer and taunting said officer to shoot him as Wilson claimed.

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Carson' statement (unless he was borrowing my tactic of using hyperbole, and it appears that is not the case) is absurd.

Carson did state that in the Obama era, people are afraid to say what they feel, and I think a greayt case can be made for that. Anyone who questions the liberal agenda is cast as a racist, bigoted, sexist, homophobic hatemonger. I don't see how anyone can disagree with that. Is that the same thing as sending me to a chlorine shower? No. Does it carry the odor of light facism? Yes.

Good enough?

As I said your responsive would include a "here is why it is different" explanation. It is laughable to compare being called sexist to comparing your country to a group of people who murdered millions. What a freakin joke.

So pls. show where anyone here "who questions the liberal agenda is cast as a racist, bigoted, sexist, homophobic hatemonger" as you repeatedly say that over and over? I've only read a very, very small amount of times where that happens (and not here).

Are you gonna call out Carson every time he is mentioned like you seem to bring up the Duke case (for what 10 years later) and try in your convoluted way to link in to liberals?

[spence]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Why stunning? I am not influenced in this matter by media bias. I don't know what evidence the grand jury heard. If there was some intentional corruption in the process, it would be one of the duties of the free press to expose that.

It would appear that while the grand jury has a lot of power the prosecutor is very influential in shaping the environment in which they work. This one even had a lot of family that wore a badge.

I don't think they have to nationalize the process. The state could ensure it's managed properly. That's not to say it would change the outcome but the people would likely have more faith the process. Seems like there's a high potential for a conflict of interest.

Stunning in that you have a video which clearly show an officer using an improper use of force against someone who while agitated didn't appear to be an imminent threat to the police or those around him. I believe the officer didn't intend to kill him and the guys health likely played a big factor. But even if you give the police the benefit of doubt it's not a free for all.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

As I said your responsive would include a "here is why it is different" explanation. It is laughable to compare being called sexist to comparing your country to a group of people who murdered millions. What a freakin joke.

So pls. show where anyone here "who questions the liberal agenda is cast as a racist, bigoted, sexist, homophobic hatemonger" as you repeatedly say that over and over? I've only read a very, very small amount of times where that happens (and not here).

Are you gonna call out Carson every time he is mentioned like you seem to bring up the Duke case (for what 10 years later) and try in your convoluted way to link in to liberals?

"It is laughable to compare being called sexist to comparing your country to a group of people who murdered millions"

I agree, which is why, if you read my post, I said Carson's comment was "absurd". I didn't think there was a lot of ambiguity in my description.

"I've only read a very, very small amount of times where that happens (and not here)."

That's your opinion Paul, I'm not a professional media watchdog, i don't have a staff tracking these things.

Obama himself, in 2008, said "they", meaning McCain, would try to make folks afraid of the fact that he's black.

Obama said very recently, and I posted this here, that Republicans "gotta stop just hating all the time".

Paul Ryan says, correctly, that SS and Medicare are not syustainable. The next day, there are commercials of Ryan pushing a wheelchair-bound lady off a cliff.

Many influential liberals routinely call out the Koch brothers by name, blaming them for everything that is wrong with the universe. I've never actually seen that before in my life, where elected officials routinely call out 2 law-abiding Americans like that.

But you're right, this isn't a divisive administration, and everyone who says it is, is wrong.

"Are you gonna call out Carson every time he is mentioned like you seem to bring up the Duke case "

I see no connection between these 2 things. Carson is a private citizen who made an idiotic comment. The Duke kids were absolutely innocent of the serious charges brought against them, but the folks on your side couldn't refrain from sacrificing all of them (constitution, shmonstitution) on the altar of white guilt and political correctness.

I still bring up that case, because as we learned in ferguson, none of the liberal idiots learned a damn thing from the Duke case. So it still seems to apply.