gee thankx, there's a stellar endorsement... 8^)
Posted on 07/06/2013 7:29:00 PM PDT by Signalman
This is a strange analysis from someone who is usually pretty conservative. He is claiming some things that the prosecution isn’t even presenting. Even if what Savage is saying is true, I’m not sure how that changes what happened. Check it out:
On his show on, talk show host Michael Savage said that George Zimmerman, who is currently on trial for the murder of Trayvon Martin, should be found guilty of second-degree manslaughter based on two things: 1) The state of his firearm and 2) The language he allegedly used on a 911 call when he was first reporting his suspicions about Martin.
But first Savage explained why his insight should be valued over others in the media covering the trial.
“I’m about to break an analysis that no one yet in the media has done, as you would expect from me — being the senior member of the American media and possibly the most insightful,” Savage said. “And I have to blow my own horn because everyone else tries to break my horn.”
gee thankx, there's a stellar endorsement... 8^)
So the general consensus is he an idiot.
Savage is wrong here, and doesn’t know the facts. However, we need to keep in mind the man has done great things for causes that were brushed aside by Rush and Hannity. Michael’s defense fund for Lt. Behenna’s wrongful imprisonment among others makes up for his bone-headed takes as of late.
Savage was also a outspoken about illegal immigration and the past 3 administration’s failure with it. I don’t see any other long running nationally syndicated hosts who have been rallying against it consistently.
WTF has Mike been smoking lately?
Bottom line, the weapon functioned precisely the way it was designed to function.
Was "coon" heard in the doctored tape? Did he really say "coon"?
Yep...although he does not do his banking in England.
The safety was not off, the safety is an intentional pull of the trigger by design as stated in the manual for the weapon under consideration here, namely a Kel-Tec PF-9 9mm semi-automatic pistol. That’s what you moron Savage!
100 % correct. Many don’t know that this design is quite common, and counterintuitive to the concept of the safety off thinking.
Just as absurd, the strongest piece of evidence that he was NOT looking for someone to intimidate or shoot IS THAT HE WAS ON WITH 911.
Looking for someone to intimidate or shoot means you would be acting as “the Lone Ranger” for sure. The last thing you would need is to be on with a police dispatcher the whole time you were trying to do your neighborhood watch job.
So what is clear is that Zimmerman was trying to carefully coordinate his activities with the cops.
Good point. Also his testimony of I hope someone has the event recorded doesn’t sound like someone trying to hid his actions.
It really irked me when those “expert” witnesses would say Zimmerman’s head and nose wounds weren’t bad enough for him to shoot the guy
Too bad there couldn’t have been a live demo of them getting punched in the nose ( and broken) and also their head hitting concrete.....
They would then realize those likely caused 2 instances of temporary
distraction, if not blackout , at the least, and would create enough fear
that the next time they wouldn’t be conscious....
I recall hearing Zimmerman on a tape made by police where he said he thought he was going to lose consciousness so he went for his gun. It appeared he thought the next blow to his head from the concrete was going to put him out.
It bothers me that some have said in the trial, that if he had not gotten out of his car, the black kid would still be alive. Well, if you hadn't left your house, you wouldn't have had that auto accident. If you hadn't gone fishing, you wouldn't have fallen in the lake. If you hadn't gone to that restaurant, you wouldn't have gotten sick on shell fish. If you hadn't turned on your TV or radio, you wouldn't have known the New York City towers had fallen.
If you hadn't walked down the street and tripped, you wouldn't have broken your ankle. If you hadn't dug that hole, you wouldn't have found that pot of gold.
There had been a number of break ins in that community and the perps were black every time and Zimmerman was head of neighborhood watch and there was a black covered by his hoodie walking in the neighborhood.
I profile when it comes to my safety.
It's more like a, "OMG, check this crazy sh*t out!"
Really. Find one of Savage's shows online and give it a half hour, just so you know what folks are talking about. At the very least, you'll be mildly entertained for a bit.
oh i got yer point alright, it just wasn't a very good answer on my part... i will try to give a listen though, thx
So do all Mammon-worshipers. Until the bank fails.
He was reporting a suspicious person? To whom? The 911 operator? He already did that.
You skipped over the part where Zimmerman approached Martin and asked him what he was doing in the neighborhood.
I’m sure Martin was not polite, and I’m also sure that Zimmerman wasn’t being very polite either. If Zimmerman was being polite, he would’ve of been the bigger man and walked away.
There is no question Zimmerman got his butt kicked, but that tends to happen when you think you’re some kind of pseudo-cop and start demanding answers from random people about why they are walking down a street.
I couldn’t hear it. Another here pointed out that even the prosecution concedes it is ‘punks’. Regardless of what it is, it doesn’t ‘prove’ murderous intent or mean Zimmerman is guilty of the charges, so for Savage to say it does is inexcusable in a so-called ‘conservative’. I thought we were leaving emotions taking the place of thinking to the Democrat-Communist coalition.
Oh really? GZ approached TM and asked him what he was doing in his neighborhood? In what fantasyland did this occur? I’ve been watching and following court testimony. Can you tell me where to find this evidence? The evidence entered so far shows actually TM circled back around and confronted GZ with angry words than a punch in the nose knocking him on the ground.
And the last time I checked an American citizen has the right to ask someone a question without being physically assaulted, but that’s not the case here anyway.
lol this is what we’re up against. SEE POST #135!
And we know who those two idiots were: frickin and frackin
BTW Welcome to Free Republic. Since 2013-5-26.
Will you be staying long???
You are aware that many acts involving minors are crimes when the same acts between consenting adults are not?
Sex between two consenting 17 year olds is not a crime. But if one of the 17 year old is a little older and becomes 18 before the other, it becomes statutory rape.
Same concept.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.