Politics On Politics.

[Burn-E]

You'd be hard pressed to find a bigger douche bag in politics today than Reince Priebus. Listening to him last night on the drive home I just kept thinking what an arrogant prig.

http://www.npr.org/2014/11/05/361820758/reince-priebus-republican-wins-the-result-of-americans-making-a-statement?utm_medium=RSS&utm_campaign=storiesfromnpr

[Piston Slapper]

I dunno, Leland Yee (the California state senator who championed gun control while dealing illegal machine guns) seems like a pretty damn big dbag... and I know dbags.

[flyfishing3]

Hillary announces in Jan.

[Kevin.]

ugh

[Burn-E]

Hillary announces in Jan.

It's gonna be a rough ride for her. If this turns out to be Bush v Clinton again I'm going to barf.

It's hilarious that Jim Webb thinks he even has a chance at this:

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/11/president-jim-webb/382977/

[theForgottenone]

Oregon is becoming a debacle in govt screwed up project and back door deal for those sleep together.

Cover Oregon, i-5 bridge replacement that spend $300 millions for planning phase for nothing, governor wife scandal and he got another term. The list go on.

[flyfishing3]

Anarchy anarchy anarchy

[Kevin.]

even more reason to require officers to have video cameras on them, it would have been a open/shut case

[Piston Slapper]

Yeah... why would they object to wearing them all the time if they don't have anything to hide?

[Burn-E]

Things are rarely open and shut even with video evidence. A white police officer shot a black youth. Was it open and shut when the police rolled up and shot down a black man wielding a knife in St Louis just a few days later and it was all captured on video?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2845846/Devastated-family-black-man-25-shot-dead-St-Louis-days-Michael-Brown-lash-police-dragging-heels-investigation.html

http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/19/us/missouri-police-shooting/

Some will say the police were justified in shooting him. And yet he did nothing to really threaten anyone else until the police showed up. He clearly was disturbed and the police did not help the situation but instead escalated it.

Search the story of Darrien Hunt in Saratoga Springs, UT who was shot down by police for carrying a sword. The police escalated that situation as well. Let's acknowledge that there is a problem with overly aggressive cops who shoot first and ask questions later.

There will be more Fergusons

[Oreo931]

Things are rarely open and shut even with video evidence. A white police officer shot a black youth. Was it open and shut when the police rolled up and shot down a black man wielding a knife in St Louis just a few days later and it was all captured on video?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2845846/Devastated-family-black-man-25-shot-dead-St-Louis-days-Michael-Brown-lash-police-dragging-heels-investigation.html

http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/19/us/missouri-police-shooting/

Some will say the police were justified in shooting him. And yet he did nothing to really threaten anyone else until the police showed up. He clearly was disturbed and the police did not help the situation but instead escalated it.

Search the story of Darrien Hunt in Saratoga Springs, UT who was shot down by police for carrying a sword. The police escalated that situation as well. Let's acknowledge that there is a problem with overly aggressive cops who shoot first and ask questions later.

There will be more Fergusons

In your opinion, was Darren Wilson justified in shooting Mike Brown?

[Burn-E]

Based on the evidence I've read, yes, he had probable cause. But I think that should have been decided in an actual trial. I don't buy the BS that McCulloch claims the Grand Jury decided not to indict. The reality is any prosecutor who wants one can get an indictment from a Grand Jury.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/dana-milbank-bob-mccullochs-pathetic-prosecution-of-darren-wilson/2014/11/25/a8459e16-74d5-11e4-a755-e32227229e7b_story.html

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/ferguson-michael-brown-indictment-darren-wilson/

That however doesn't change the fact that he put himself in harms way and could have easily waited the 1 minute for backup to arrive before engaging with Brown. In other words, once he was engaged, yes he had a right to protect himself.

However, Wilson escalated the encounter which seems to happen way, way, too often. Instead of rolling back in an aggressive manner and putting himself between the two boys and all traffic he could have pulled to the side of the road. It wasn't like they were running away from him.

[Piston Slapper]

He was attacked while still in his car, where he was waiting for back up... was he supposed to drive off because there was one criminal in the area? One officer should be able to confront one unarmed shoplifter anyway. If said shoplifter commits suicide by cop, that's on him.

[Burn-E]

Howard, go actually read Wilson's testimony before commenting. What you've written here has so little relation to the truth it's laughable.

http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/1371222-wilson-testimony.html

You're a fine example of the problem with online punditry. Everyone's an expert even though they only know what someone else wrote or what they heard on the TV.

Let's catalog your errors for the fun of it:

"He was attacked while still in his car, where he was waiting for back up... was he supposed to drive off because there was one criminal in the area? One officer should be able to confront one unarmed shoplifter anyway."

And they kept walking, as I said, they never once stopped, never got on the sidewalk, they stayed in the middle of the road. So I got on my radio and Frank 21 is my call sign that day, I said Frank 2l I'm on Canfield with two, send me another car.

I then placed my car in reverse and backed up and I backed up just past them and then angled my vehicle, the back of my vehicle to kind of cut them off kind to keep them somewhat contained.

As I did that, I go to open the door and I say, hey, come here for a minute to Brown.

So, there were two shoplifters. One of whom even Wilson admitted seemed pissed and bigger than him.

Wilson backed up aggressively and whipped the car in front of the young men to cut them off.

He went to get out of his car calling to Brown in the process.

Hmmm, the way you describe it Brown walked up the car and just attacked Wilson unprovoked.

[Oreo931]

Based on the evidence I've read, yes, he had probable cause. But I think that should have been decided in an actual trial. I don't buy the BS that McCulloch claims the Grand Jury decided not to indict. The reality is any prosecutor who wants one can get an indictment from a Grand Jury.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/dana-milbank-bob-mccullochs-pathetic-prosecution-of-darren-wilson/2014/11/25/a8459e16-74d5-11e4-a755-e32227229e7b_story.html

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/ferguson-michael-brown-indictment-darren-wilson/

That however doesn't change the fact that he put himself in harms way and could have easily waited the 1 minute for backup to arrive before engaging with Brown. In other words, once he was engaged, yes he had a right to protect himself.

However, Wilson escalated the encounter which seems to happen way, way, too often. Instead of rolling back in an aggressive manner and putting himself between the two boys and all traffic he could have pulled to the side of the road. It wasn't like they were running away from him.

The "public" wanted an indictment. That is why McCulloch passed it along to the GJ. Had McCulloch felt there was enough evidence to charge Wilson, he would have done so. The only reason this went to the GJ in the first place is because of politics, and public pressure. Before an individual is charged with a crime, there must be a determination of whether there is probable cause to believe that a crime was committed. There is no reason this should have gone to trial.

It's easy to second guess an officer's actions and play devil's advocate. Hindsight is always 20-20. And I disagree with your statement that Wilson escalated the encounter, especially if it is based simply on the manner in which he reversed his car and where he positioned it in the roadway. That's BS.

The bottom line is that Mike Brown had countless opportunities to obey the commands of a police officer, and he chose to disregard those commands and attack a police officer. Anyone who claims this incident involved racism or excessive force is ignoring facts and the physical evidence.