This image has been circulating on twitter:

 

I keep seeing people tweet about a 13 year old being shot 19 times by the NYPD. He was actually 34. I'm not saying that to justify the shooting, but mostly because retweeting false information muddies the waters and makes less people willing to believe future stories. 

 

People also keep retweeting a doctored photo of Hitler holding the Bible. 

Protests were much more peaceful in Kansas City last night. Perhaps they arrested the 200 or so hoodlums the previous 2 nights and left the decent people remaining to protest. 

 

 

  

Obviously, I speak only for myself, but I won't accept anything less than first-degree murder.

1 hour ago, Khan said:

Obviously, I speak only for myself, but I won't accept anything less than first-degree murder.

Then there would never be a conviction. Second degree murder is proper in this case. You might educate yourself on murder charges.

Edited June 3, 20205 yr by alphanguy74

To the surprise of no one, the NYT is now openly advocating a military takeover of our country.

 

 

Edited June 3, 20205 yr by DRW50

30 minutes ago, DRW50 said:

To the surprise of no one, the NYT is now openly advocating a military takeover of our country.

 

 

 

It's an opinion column from a lickspittle Republican. Most comments in NYT from average citizens I saw last night in an article about the protests were eviscerating Republicans.

33 minutes ago, DRW50 said:

To the surprise of no one, the NYT is now openly advocating a military takeover of our country.

 

 

Now that the other 3 have been charged, and with the upgrade to second degree murder... I think things will calm down now, Those charges are all proper considering the evidence we have. 

 

  

2 hours ago, DRW50 said:

To the surprise of no one, the NYT is now openly advocating a military takeover of our country.

 

 

 

There are also editorials supporting the protests and denouncing the Trump administration's latest attempt at posturing.  The NYT might very well want a military takeover, but you can't argue as much on the basis of one opinion column written by a rank-and-file Republican.

The NYT still should never have printed it. Their eagerness to appease the right and crawl on their belly for conservative readers while still begging for "resistance warrior" status shines through regularly. They are scrambling to explain this article with their usual 'present both sides' crap, but it's not gonna work this time.

 

 

1 hour ago, Khan said:

 

There are also editorials supporting the protests and denouncing the Trump administration's latest attempt at posturing.  The NYT might very well want a military takeover, but you can't argue as much on the basis of one opinion column written by a rank-and-file Republican.

He's promoting war crimes. I mean whats next a "Why rape is ok" by Harvey Weinstein?