You mention that some folks here are gullible. That could well be true. But in this instant I see myself as suspicious, not gullible.
Consider this analogy. Let’s suppose a small businessman goes on Fox News, and exposes IRS corruption. And this greatly embarrasses the IRS, even though they deny the corruption.
And then just a week later the small businessman is the subject of an IRS audit, where irregularities are found. The IRS says the timing of the audit is just a coincidence.
It might be a bit unfair to the IRS, but be honest. Wouldn’t you be a bit suspicious, especially given past IRS excesses?
I hope you see the point I’m trying to make here.
I’m sorry, I’m not making the correlation. I watched the Garner video, I read the Medical Examiners report. Garner did not die from being choked. His trachea was not damaged. I watched the ‘choke’ and I know how to apply the choke. The cop only had what could be considered a choke for about 2 seconds and Garner was talking and conscious when he did. You can not talk when you are being choked. I have been choked myself countless times.
The video is going to vindicate that cop.
Not more than a week later the media ran another story about another cop ‘choking’ a woman. Watching that video they lied again.
Now we are lead to believe the cops planted a gun on the guy that shot the video so they could arrest him and negate the video evidence?
Why would I want to dismiss a video that was going to show my innocence? And his arrest isn’t going to make any difference in the case anyway.
Question: Did the cops hand the gun off to the girlfriend too? You know, like a BOGO deal? Get both of them with one gun? Bust One Get One?
unreal