[thefactor]

Two things can be true at the same time:

He was no jogger.

His murderers should never see the light of day again.

[SandwicheGuy]

He wasn’t murdered. In Texas we say “Death by mis-adventure.”

[KC_Conspirator]

You are correct: both can be true, he was not jogging, but he was murdered.

[SauronOfMordor]

Two things can be true at the same time:

He should not have been shot.

The world was likely improved by his leaving it.

[bort]

Two things can be true at the same time:
He was no jogger.
His murderers should never see the light of day again.

---

As an attorney who has prosecuted/defended thousands of cases, including murder cases, please explain for me exactly how the elder McMichael, who did nothing but stand in the back of a truck and did not shoot his gun (or even draw it until the shotgun went off) is guilty of first degree murder. Seriously, I would like someone to explain to me how you are a murderer for standing in a truck. This is why this case is outrageous. These a-hole Atlanta prosecutors are basically filing charges based on theories put out by the race-baiting family attorneys, and now they are threatening to charge a guy filming the incident.

[vpintheak]

I’m with you.

[libertylover]

Maybe you should watch the video. Closely.

[jeffersondem]

“He was no jogger.”

If it is true he was not a jogger, then who developed that narrative and why was the narrative spread?

Who would benefit from a false narrative?

Was the false narrative designed to help the accused? Or to harm the accused?