Obama: Ferguson Is Totally Like A National Problem, Throws Police Under Bus

There’s no surprise in any of this. Once a community agitator, always a community agitator. He’s long been a race baiter, and he easily threw the Boston PD under the bus. He quickly takes sides without evidence. He whips up negative sentiments. Now he’s putting the burden on the police for race relations

(The Hill) President Obama on Monday kept the national debate firmly on Ferguson, Mo., as he took a series of steps that he said would rebuild trust between police officers and minority communities.

The president dedicated his entire public schedule to Ferguson, meeting with civil rights leaders, Cabinet officials and law enforcement officers after a long holiday weekend when the shooting had begun to slip from the headlines.

“This is a problem that is national,” Obama said. “It is a solvable problem, but it is one that unfortunately spikes but fades into background. What we need is a sustained conversation … to move forward in a constructive fashion.”

National, huh? He’s basically blaming police officers and departments nationwide for what occurred in Ferguson, where a young thug who just robbed a store and assaulted the clerk, then assaulted a police officer and attempted to take his weapon, then charged a police officer was shot to death. That’s not the problem of the police: that’s a problem with Obama’s base. Let’s face facts: most of these types of “mistrust” issues occur in areas that heavily vote Democrat. If we want a sustained conversation, then we should certainly discuss why Obama’s base is so violent, and why they think violent actions are a proper response. Why they think looting and burning businesses in their own community is the proper response. Because that has absolutely zero to do with any mistrust.

Obama’s public events took place a week after a grand jury in Ferguson decided not to indict police officer Darren Wilson in the shooting of Michael Brown, triggering protests around the country. While the president has been careful not to take sides in the racially charged case, he made clear that he thinks changes at local police departments are needed.

For starters, Obama requested federal funding that could purchase 50,000 body-worn cameras for police officers, something the family of slain 18-year-old Brown has lobbied for.

While providing local police departments is a wonderful idea, one has to wonder as to Obama’s motives, based on his political career. Might this be a move to give the federal government more control of local policing, something that would be linked directly to the Progressive goal of giving the federal government more and more power? That thought is not out of the realm of possibility.

And Obama said he would create a new task force that will examine “how to promote effective crime reduction while building public trust,” in the words of a White House official. That panel will be led by Philadelphia Police Commissioner Charles Ramsey and former Assistant Attorney General Laurie Robinson.

How about telling his base that rioting, looting, burning cars (including police cars) and buildings, assaulting and killing each other, along with other violent activities is unacceptable? That might be a good first step. Many police and police departments are not immune to charges, but they are often responding to the problems in Obama voter communities.

BTW, when will Obama worry about the huge amount of Black on Black crime? Of course, even mentioning the crime statistics will bring immediate denial about the problems from hardcore Leftists, who prefer to stick their heads in the sand. It’s almost like they prefer Black on Black crime in inner cities.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

28 Responses to “Obama: Ferguson Is Totally Like A National Problem, Throws Police Under Bus”

  1. Kevin says:

    I like the idea of mandatory, unerasable, ‘always on’ cameras worn by police and an additional one attached to the car.

    No need for any kind of task force or federal government oversight. The cameras will quickly identify where the trouble lies – with the cop or with the perp.

  2. gitarcarver says:

    I like the idea of mandatory, unerasable, ‘always on’ cameras worn by police and an additional one attached to the car.

    I agree. The only issue is the cost, but that may be illustrated by this example:

    Since 2011, the City of Baltimore has paid out over $13 million dollars in damages in cases where there were charges of excessive abuse by the police. If the actions of the police were being recorded, it is reasonable to assume the cops would not do use excessive force or the charges against them would be shown to be false.

    The cost of outfitting the cameras for the police force is $5 million.

    The police are against the expenditure of $5 million which may save $13 million over4 years.

    I keep saying that the citizen reaction in Ferguson was wrong based on the facts, but police and their attitudes and actions often make the situation and the foundations of interaction with the community worse than they need to be.

  3. John says:

    The cop shot him from 50 yards away and do scribed him as looking like a black demon

  4. david7134 says:

    john,
    The cop shot the guy from 50 yards? Do you know anything about hand guns? 50 yards would be a wonder shot. But the evidence point more to about 20 feet. Don’t let knowledge get in the way.

  5. Jeffery says:

    That Negro Obama also threw the Wall Street banksters under the bus.

    Will this man ever stop?

    Pity the poor police officer. They get about $50,000 a year (national median) to ride around all day. Every now and then they have to do something. And they get to carry a gun, boss folks around and shoot people with little consequence.

    Officer Cruz (non-white) had a body camera when he killed the unarmed Caucasian, Dillon Taylor. Cruz was not indicted, but I suspect he (and the city) would lose a civil case.

    qc, I may have missed it. Did you ever answer the question about Grand Juries. You claimed they had to have unanimous decisions, i.e., 12-0 votes. I read somewhere that some Grand Juries have a 2/3 or 3/4 requirement. What say you, since you made the claim. The St Louis County Grand Jury had 9 white folks and 3 Black folks, i.e., 3/4 white. Bob McCulloch, a Democrat, who shepherded Wilson’s non-indictment through the GJ, would not comment on the vote breakdown, even though he released most everything else to support his position. Does it have to 12-0 in St. Louis County or were you lying then?

  6. Jeffery says:

    dave,

    You are correct that the shots were fired at a much closer range.

    That said, the killer fired 12 times and hit Mr. Brown 7 or 8. So 4 or 5 shots were misses. According to several witnesses, the killer fired at Mr. Brown as he was running away, but the autopsies confirm that those shots almost certainly did not hit Mr. Brown.

    Perhaps Mr. Brown stopped running and turned around when he heard shots. It was then that the killer delivered the fatal shots. Mr. Brown’s right arm was hit three times (and his thumb shot at the police car), which likely explains his tucking his right arm as he faced his killer. Then he was shot in the chest, eye and top of the head as he was bent forward at the waist. His killer claimed he was charging him. Other witnessed said he was slumping.

    I feel bad for Officer Wilson for putting himself in this situation. If he had been more competent this would have been avoided.

    Bob McCulloch should have prosecuted the killer and let a jury decide, but that is not in McCulloch’s DNA.

  7. david7134 says:

    Jeff,
    Fascinating that your analysis has nothing to do with the facts, the evidence, 50% of the witnesses (who must be held to usually be in error except when their analysis fits with evidence as they were). Also, if you take a gun course, you will be told by the sheriff to fire multiple times at a target, usually advised that you empty the clip. As it is, the office showed considerable restraint considering the assault on him. There is no way to paint this except that Brown was a thug with no respect for others and the law and got what his attitude would lead to.

  8. Jeffery says:

    The “assault” on the killer had only two surviving witnesses – the killer and Mr. Dorian Johnson.

    Mr. Brown was the only other witness and he is, at this time, dead.

    Mr. Johnson did not observe Mr. Brown pounding his killer, but stated that the killer was trying to hold Mr. Brown who was trying to get away. The killer shot at Mr. Brown twice while at the car, grazing him once, a few more times as Mr. Brown ran away and then a few more times (fatally) when Mr. Brown stopped and turned around.

    What restraint did the killer of Mr. Brown show? He shot at him twice at the car and then 10 more times until he killed him.

    The killer had no serious injuries consistent with being struck several times by a 292 lb 18 year old (contrary to the quality reporting of the odious jimhoft of the Gateway Pudendum).

    Would the killer have any reason to lie about the nature of the struggle. What possible motive could the killer have to lie?

  9. gitarcarver says:

    You claimed they had to have unanimous decisions, i.e., 12-0 votes.

    I never said any such thing, Jeffery.

    Once again, we see that you have to try and lie to make a point.

    Missouri law requires 9 votes out of 12 to have an indictment. And in case you are wondering (but given your comprehension level, I doubt it) the standard for the issuance of a indictment in Missouri is similar to most states which is whether it is “more likely than not” there was a crime committed. It is a different standard than that of “beyond reasonable doubt.”

    What say you, since you made the claim.

    In that I never made that claim, there is nothing to say. (Other than you are a liar and ignorant of the matter on which you speak.)

    Bob McCulloch, a Democrat, who shepherded Wilson’s non-indictment through the GJ, would not comment on the vote breakdown, even though he released most everything else to support his position.

    Once again you show your ignorance on the subject matter. It is illegal for the DA or even the jurors themselves to release the vote count of a Grand Jury in Missouri. (MO Statutes 540.320) Your whole point falls apart when one realizes that you are accusing a man and the members of the grand jury of following the law.

    Then again, truth never matters to you.

    I feel bad for Officer Wilson for putting himself in this situation. If he had been more competent this would have been avoided.

    Of course, if Brown had not robbed a store, mouthed off at Wilson, gotten into a fight with Wilson, and then charged Wilson, none of this would have happened.

    Tell me Jeffery, is it your belief that a person who attacks a police officer without cause should be allowed to skip away? It is your belief that if a person attacks you with deadly force as Brown did in this case, that you have no right to defend yourself? If you believe that there is no right to defense, let us all know where you live. If you believe that there is right of defense, why do you believe that right disappears because a person wears a badge?

    There are cases of police brutality and excessive use of force. This case isn’t one of them.

    Bob McCulloch should have prosecuted the killer and let a jury decide, but that is not in McCulloch’s DNA.

    The stupid is strong in you. The case could not have gone forward to a jury trial without a indictment from the grand jury.

    So where are we? Oh yeah. We are at the point where once again you have lied to try and make others look bad. We are at the point where you continually show your ignorance on the case. We are at the point were you are proving that you continue to be a racist.

    Look in the mirror. There is plenty there for you to work on.

  10. Kevin says:

    The only thing I know for sure is that the guy roughed up a clerk and stole some cigars. I know that because I saw it on video.

    The rest is just choosing who’s story to believe.

  11. gitarcarver says:

    Mr. Johnson did not observe Mr. Brown pounding his killer, but stated that the killer was trying to hold Mr. Brown who was trying to get away.

    Johnson also stated that Brown never reached inside the car. If Johnson’s testimony is truthful, how do you explain Brown’s blood inside the car? How do you explain tissue from Brown’s body in the car? How do you explain Brown’s DNA on Wilson’s weapon?

    You keep quoting Johnson as if he is a credible witness. Clearly to rational thinking people he is not.

    What restraint did the killer of Mr. Brown show? He shot at him twice at the car and then 10 more times until he killed him.

    What restraint did Brown show after attacking Wilson, and then coming at him again and again and again?

    The killer had no serious injuries consistent with being struck several times by a 292 lb 18 year old

    You mean the swelling on his face wasn’t enough for you? Since you believe that Wilson tried to pull Brown into the car, or at least hold him there, (which makes no sense) where are the marks on Browns neck that show Wilson grabbed him there?

    Would the killer have any reason to lie about the nature of the struggle.

    Good thing he didn’t lie and the evidence backs him up, eh?

    Why aren’t you asking the same question about Johnson? What motive would he have had to lie other than been an accessory to two felonies?

    Or isn’t that a motive to you?

  12. Jeffery says:

    You said 12 jurors decided. Now you change that to 9. It was just a mistake on your part that you corrected with a little research. Kudos.

    I actually knew the answer and why McCulloch couldn’t disclose the vote (he is actually the prosecutor of my county, St. Louis – and I watched his performance in real time – where he explained it). I was just kicking you for not knowing. So 9 whites folks on the GJ and you needed 9 votes not to prosecute. What a coincidence.

    You seem to believe every word that the killer uttered.

    It seems likely that the killer said, “Get the fuck on the sidewalk!”, then rapidly reversed his cruiser cutting off the pair. It’s also likely that an 18 yr old would have said, “Go fuck yourself, cop.” It’s likely the scared and angry cop slammed the door into the 18 yr old and grabbed him, and shot at him twice, hitting Brown’s hand, spraying blood on the killer and his Sig Sauer.

    Then Mr. Brown took off running, stopped when the killer was shooting at him, turned around and was shot to death by the killer.

    There was no evidence that Mr. Brown assaulted his killer, other than the killer’s own words. It must be nice to be able to shoot an unarmed man dead and tell the authorities that he started it and I had no choice but to shoot him several times – the last 2 as he was falling.

    Will you accept the findings from the FBI and Justice Dept investigations when they decide to prosecute the killer.

    As I said, the killer has my sympathy. I think he is incompetent, not evil.

    You typed:

    The case could not have gone forward to a jury trial without a indictment from the grand jury.

    That is untrue in Missouri. McCulloch could have taken the case before a judge for a preliminary hearing. Most cases are handled this way but McCulloch did not want to prosecute this particular killer.

    I could say you’re lying but I won’t since I’m a better man than you.

  13. gitarcarver says:

    You said 12 jurors decided. Now you change that to 9. It was just a mistake on your part that you corrected with a little research. Kudos.

    Comprehension problems again Jeffery?

    Twelve jurors did decide this case. All twelve had a vote. The fact that it takes 9 to indict does not mean that 12 jurors did not hear and decide the case.

    When will you learn to read?

    I was just kicking you for not knowing.

    Not know what? You were mistaken on the number of jurors that heard and decided the case. You were mistaken when you said that the jurors and the prosecutor could disclose the vote. Clearly you lied which is your tactic.

    If anything, your comments showed you did not know what you were talking about.

    So 9 whites folks on the GJ and you needed 9 votes not to prosecute. What a coincidence.

    Except that this grand jury had indicted other others for white on black crimes and black on white crimes. Once again we see you raising the racism charge when the facts go against you.

    You seem to believe every word that the killer uttered.

    You seem to believe every word the felon uttered despite the forensic evidence not supporting his statement.

    It’s likely the scared and angry cop slammed the door into the 18 yr old and grabbed him, and shot at him twice, hitting Brown’s hand, spraying blood on the killer and his Sig Sauer.

    That’s funny. Really. That defies all the scientific evidence, but hey, one thing I have learned about you is that the truth and science don’t matter to you.

    There was no evidence that Mr. Brown assaulted his killer, other than the killer’s own words.

    Except for the forensic evidence, you are correct. You also have the testimony of witnesses saying Brown reached into the vehicle attacking Wilson. But I guess that is not evidence in your world.

    That is untrue in Missouri. McCulloch could have taken the case before a judge for a preliminary hearing.

    Sorry. Wrong. The prosecutor could have taken the case before a judge if the case was a misdemeanor. For felony charges such as the ones presented to the grand jury, there must be an indictment.

    I could say you’re lying but I won’t since I’m a better man than you.

    It’s pretty pathetic when you have to lie about the things you say from your own mouth Jeffery. (Delusional as well.)

    qc, You’re a douchebag and a liar, not two ways about it.

    Don’t worry. I expect that you won’t be a man and say that you lied and were caught in that lie. After all, in this thread alone we have you admitting you lied, we have you making up conclusions and accusations due to your lack of reading comprehension and now we have you lying about what you said about others.

  14. jl says:

    “The killer shot at Mr. Brown..” Oh, my, Jeffery- how desperate. The young thug had done little in his life to deserve a “Mr.” in front of his name, but a nice, typical liberal try at twisting things around. “The policeman fired at thug Brown as he was running away.” No, the autopsies showed the shots came from the front. “Perhaps thug Brown stopped running when he heard the shots and turned around.” Perhaps you’re snorting crack to say something so stupid. Yes, that’s what people do when they hear gun shots- run toward them. Got it. If thug Brown had acted like a civilized human being, he’d be alive today.

  15. Jeffery says:

    The autopsies showed that the bullets that hit Mr. Brown came from the front but several shots were misses. And I didn’t say he shot him when he was running away, only that the killer shot at Mr. Brown. According to the autopsies, the killer missed until Mr. Brown turned around.

    After Mr. Brown stopped and turned around the killer shot him 6 or 7 times, a few times in his right arm, probably explaining why he had his right arm tucked. Perhaps Mr. Brown decided to surrender when he heard his future killer shooting at him as he ran away.

    How much do you know about Mr. Brown’s life? If he had killed someone we probably would have heard about it. On the other hand, former Officer Darren Wilson is a proven killer.

  16. Jeffery says:

    j,

    Here’s an article about Mr. Brown’s life up to the fateful day he stole the cigars, jaywalked, cursed at a cop and got killed. It might humanize the dead man a bit in your eyes, making it less likely you’ll someone names out of ignorance.

    BTW… Have you ever stolen anything? Even as a kid? Jaywalk? Have you ever been cursed by a cop?

    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/25/us/michael-brown-spent-last-weeks-grappling-with-lifes-mysteries.html?_r=0

  17. Jl says:

    “And I ididn’t say he shot him while he was running away.” And I didn’t say that you did. You alluded to someone shooting as he ran, then he “may” have turned toward the firing- which is BS, as there’s no evidence of that. And the fact that even thug Brown was probably smart enough not to do that. “The autopsies showed the shots came from the front but several shots were misses.” An autopsy can’t say where supposed missed shots came from, sorry. Have you ever tried to take a policeman’s gun? Have you ever ran straight at a policeman as he was telling you to stop? Have you ever robbed a store? “He’s a proven killer” he’s a witness-backed policeman, proven that he acted in self-defense.

  18. Jl says:

    “Here’s an article on thug Brown’s life….it may humanize him…” Right. He was just a big 285 pound baby Huey. Shoulda just given him a time out.

  19. Jeffery says:

    There is no evidence Mr. Brown turned around? Really? Was he running backwards the whole time?

    An autopsy can’t say where supposed missed shots came from, sorry.

    So the police were wrong in counting the number of shots fired? Since the killer fired 12 shots and there were less than 12 holes in Mr. Brown’s corpse, do you agree we can safely assume there were some misses?

    There was no evidence that Mr. Brown tried to take his killer’s gun. Just the word of an admitted killer desperately trying to avoid a murder indictment.

  20. gitarcarver says:

    There was no evidence that Mr. Brown tried to take his killer’s gun. Just the word of an admitted killer desperately trying to avoid a murder indictment.

    Except for the DNA on the gun, you’re right. And the eyewitnesses who back up the story that Brown was reaching inside the vehicle (not pulled in like the thief Johnson said he was.)

    Once again, we see you trying to deny the science of the matter.

  21. Jeffery says:

    While DNA on the gun is consistent with Mr. Brown contacting the gun, there are other reasons for his DNA to be found there. The officer could have Mr. Brown’s blood on his hands; blood could have been transferred when the officer shot Mr. Brown in the hand; Brown’s blood could have been on the door and touched by the officer; Brown could have been pushing the gun away as the officer tried to shoot him… Mr. Brown reaching into the cruiser doesn’t prove or even suggest he was reaching for the officer’s gun.

    Why trust an alleged thief more than a proven killer?

  22. Jeffery says:

    in St. Louis, the prosecutor and Grand Jury declined to indict a white police officer who shot an unarmed Black teenager.

    In Seattle, a Black man posting on Facebook about the St. Louis incident was indicted and can get 5 years in prison for typing: “We the oppressed people need to kill this white cop.”

  23. Jeffery says:

    The Ferguson police chief was on Hannity last night stating that the Ferguson police are pursuing an investigation of Michael Brown’s stepdad for “inciting to riot”.

    Shooting an unarmed teenager, OK. Angry outburst from stepdad, not so much.

  24. Jeffery says:

    From the Onion:

    With riots raging in Ferguson, MO following the shooting death by police of an unarmed African-American youth, the nation has turned its eyes toward social injustice and the continuing crisis of race relations. Here are The Onion’s tips for being an unarmed black teen in America:

    •Shy away from dangerous, heavily policed areas.
    •Avoid swaggering or any other confident behavior that suggests you are not completely subjugated.
    •Be sure not to pick up any object that could be perceived by a police officer as a firearm, such as a cell phone, a food item, or nothing.
    •Explain in clear and logical terms that you do not enjoy being shot, and would prefer that it not happen.
    •Don’t let society stereotype you as a petty criminal. Remember that you can be seen as so much more, from an armed robbery suspect, to a rape suspect, to a murder suspect.
    •Try to see it from a police officer’s point of view: You may be unarmed, but you’re also black.
    •Avoid wearing clothing associated with the gang lifestyle, such as shirts and pants.
    •Revel in the fact that by simply existing, you exert a threatening presence over the nation’s police force.
    •Be as polite and straightforward as possible when police officers are kicking the shit out of you.

  25. david7134 says:

    Jeff,
    You really have something seriously wrong with you. I am saying this in all honesty and recommend you get some help. There is no need to rebut all you have said as it is not grounded in reality.

  26. Jl says:

    J-“there is no evidence he turned around? Really?” I never said he did or didn’t turn around. I said he was shot from the front, which is true. “So the police were wrong in counting the number of shots fired?” Who said that? Not me. Still doing your bang-up job of reading comprehension, I see. I said an autopsy can’t show where missed shots came from. That’s true when I said it before and still is now. Not only do you have trouble reading, but you put meaning into things that were never intended. “There is no evidence thug Brown tried to take the policeman’s gun.” Yes, there is. Blood and DNA traces demonstrated that thug Brown initiated the altercation by attacking Wilson while he was inside his car. “Shooting an unarmed teenager, ok….” No, shooting in self defense, as the evidence and several black witnesses agree. And why mention he was an unarmed teenager? Most homicides are committed by teenagers, in case you hadn’t noticed. It doesn’t take a weapon to kill someone. Anyway, he was attempting to arm himself and obviously kill Wilson by stealing his gun. “There could be other reasons for the blood on the gun.” Yah, aliens could have done it. But witnesses and DNA showed it happened as was portrayed in the Grand Jury testimony. Seems the Onion forgot a few. Don’t rob stores. Don’t try to take a policeman’s gun. Stop charging a policeman when he yells stop. Don’t be a thug. Do these things and you may out-live your teenage years.

  27. Jl says:

    J-“In Seattle, a black man posting on facebook was indicted “we need to kill this cop.” In Seattle and most everywhere else, a white man can be indicted for the same thing. So what’s your point?

  28. Jeffery says:

    Another win for the cops!

    Eric Garner was choked to death by a cop on video and no charges filed!

    Was it self-defense? Nope. Just a routine arrest for selling cigarettes.

Bad Behavior has blocked 8303 access attempts in the last 7 days.