[ican'tbelieveit]

I love when this poster puts something up to "bolster" their case. In this case, this article by the Blaze is hilariously pro-plaintiff. They try to suck you in the with the headline, but actually reading the article produces some amazing finds.

First, is the "evidence" for the search warrant:

Notice here (underlined) that the "suspect" is known to carry drugs in his anal cavity, even having been caught with drugs in his anal cavity, according to the K-9 handler. The same K-9 handler that did not get his dog certified to work in NM... hmmm.

But, the Blaze goes on to explain:

"Eckert’s history with drugs had been revealed by his attorneys, Joseph and Shannon Kennedy, but there was no mention of any previous attempts to transport drugs in his anal cavity. Still, though court records confirm Eckert’s history of drug-related offenses, we found no information confirming police’s claim that he once was caught with drugs in his anal cavity."

So, the warrant was obtained, in part, based on the K9 officer's statement that this man was "known to insert drugs in his anal cavity." Yet there is no police record of that.

[DariusBane]

I know. Very flimsy stuff to cling to.

[dragnet2]

These people in government are professionals at attempting to discredit people to rationalize their behavior...

They lie as a matter of routine and use the corrupt MSM as a vehicle to discredit their targets.

They do this on a daily basis.