Posted on 01/09/2011 12:04:12 PM PST by Free ThinkerNY
TUCSON, Ariz. (AP) -- Arizona authorities say a second man has been cleared of any involvement in Rep. Gabrielle Giffords shooting.
Pima County Sheriff's Deputy Jason Ogan said Sunday that the man, a suspected accomplice in the shooting Saturday, was not involved.
(Excerpt) Read more at hosted.ap.org ...
a. A jet plane smashing into the WTC
b. A gun is put to the head of the Congresswoman you are visiting
c. Two cars ahead someone brakes suddenly and a guy smacks your car from the rear.
Which happened first?
Interestingly enough many people wouldn't be able to tell you if any two of those events occurred on the same day.
Here we have a situation where people are in fear of their lives, a guy is just pumping out rounds and people are falling, and sure you may have seen a pistol at the Congresswoman's head, but she could have been third in line ~
The police will interview everybody on the scene to get a clearer picture.
What you said about the judge is what the sheriff said at his cranky press conference yesterday.
As for the speculation about who the shooter’s target was, I think they assume it was the congresswoman because he went straight to her and shot her first.
Also, she was identifiable at the event. The judge was just a bystander, not there in any official capacity.
Definitely not c because I couldn’t get 25 people into my car.
Confusion and errant facts are normal when something like this occurs.
It’s not conspiratorial, just normal “fog of war,” unavoidable until things settle down. Happens every time.
I’m reading Bush’s “Decision Points.” Interesting chapters on all the misinformation and confusion on 9/11.
I was thinking the second man was his “boyfriend”.
it does appear an earlier posting of yours was correct.
Your recollections are correct. Though I posted elsewhere the Judge’s involvement with a very curious case just concluded where he was likely to rule against the administration. It appears he was the victim of bad luck.
No harm. When I read you post, I thought, huh, liberal judges don’t attend church. ;-)
You would have to spend time in a news room during the early happenings of an event like yesterday to understand why there is much bad information passed along. Breaking news is a very competitive business, and being first on the air with even a little tidbit of info is very important to the bosses. Oh, they do lip service to accuracy, but the way they behave in moments like this conveys anything but a motive to hold a tip until it can be verified.
In today's MFM world the local newspaper, TV and online news gatherers and presenters often share a news room and personnel. Not a good formula for assuring accuracy in reporting.
In my case I worked for a newspaper that shared its facilities and personnel with both the area's leading TV station and the parent company's online version of the news. It is especially hectic when the breaking news story is happening at or near deadline time for the paper. Lots of people doing lots of things and consequently lots of opportunity for things to go wrong.
It does not help that many, actually most, of those in the news business are liberals, often flaming liberals, who desperately want any report, tip or hint of a Right Wing involvement in a story like yesterday's to be true. They have an entirely different mindset when it comes to handling news about liberals compared to how they handle news that might put Conservatives in a bad light. It's almost like a genetic thing with them. Most of them don't even realize how different they behave when dealing with one or the other. My job was often helping them find art work for a story and I've seen them firsthand bypass a better picture of a conservative in favor of a less flattering picture of the same person. They just can't seem to help themselves when it comes time to present information on a conservative.
I must hasten to add though that I've never seen them deliberately present false information, just spin the hell out of how the story is told.
As a story moves through the food chain of content for the next broadcast or edition it becomes less and less likely to have information in it challenged. By the time it reaches the managing editor he or she, often erroneously, assumes it's been fact-checked. If it's a line or fact that seems reasonable in the editor's view of the world and the news it can just slide right by them.
For a staunch conservative like myself working in the belly of the beast was often like I had died and gone to hell.
Perhaps some do. As they kneel on a Lenin prayer rug and bow to Trotsky and Stalin.
Right you are! Maybe it’s this ethnic tradition that makes him the way that he is.
“The Dupnik is a traditional folk dance that requires the dancing couple to acknowledge their presence by first bowing to each other then turn around and ram their “dupa” or rear ends together.”
I guess Tucson is “Berkeley on the Border,” Dupnik has been in local law enforcement for 50 years, with 30 as Sheriff. My guess is that he doesn’t often “do lunch” with fellow sheriffs, Joe Arpaio or Paul Babeau.
They let the guy off the hook because they have the fall guy in custody.
And the Judge could very well have been followed.
and your statement is why we can only hear about it here.
Is there a “grassy knoll” anywhere near the shooting site? This guy, Loughner, sounds just like Lee Harvey Oswald.
“If the judge had been the target and the congresswoman had not been shot, we wouldn’t have had an appearance and statement by Obama for days”
Much like the POS did after the recruiting center, and Ft. Hood shootings?
God in Heaven, Opus, I pray you are right!
I sincerely hope the overall electorate aren’t falling for this.
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.