This New York Times article stinks to high heaven.
Darren Wilson claims he feared for his life and shot Michael Brown in self defense. That dog don’t hunt! Why fear when you’re the ONLY one with a fucking gun?
Darren Wilson shot Michael Brown from inside car. So the New York Times wants us to believe a kid who was shot, runs away, decides to charge Darren Wilson?
In what world does an unarmed kid who has been shot, runs away from a hail of bullets to charge into more hail of bullets? Fuckouttahere New York Times.
The New York Times goes on to say Michael Brown’s blood was found inside the car. Of course Michael Brown’s blood is going to be found inside Darren Wilson police car, it’s not rocket science. Wilson fired from inside the car but NONE of Wilson’s blood is found.
Can the New York Times explain why Wilson continued to fire bullets into Michael Brown and pause for 3 seconds when his hands were up surrendering? 6 consistent eyewitnesses says Michael Brown’s hands were up.
But the New York Times would rather take the word of a police union thug, Jeff Roorda, who has a history of falsifying reports, misconduct and FIRED because of it than 6 consistent black eyewitnesses.
When the orbital eye socket didn’t work, the msm pushed “Josie” LIE, when witnesses shredded that lie, now they’re back to “he went for my gun and I was afraid for my life” BS.
Face it America, 6 black eyewitnesses is not credible enough for the white media. They MUST take the white man’s word at any cost. Taney’s LAW! “Blacks have no rights which the white man is bound to respect”.
As co-blogger Ametia says…”Hopefully that New York Times is going to become extinct. In the meantime, I’m sure kitty litter boxes would appreciate it”.