Former FEMA director Michael "Heck of a job" Brown criticizes President Obama for not showing up for a photo-op during Louisiana flooding.

"I have no fucking idea what I'm doing?"

Courtesy of Mediaite:  

The ex-director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is criticizing President Obama for not making a better effort to head down to Louisiana and address the state’s devastating floods. 

“He could have gone to Lilly Armstrong Airport in New Orleans and made a statement there, or at the very least, what he should have done,” Brown said according to Washington Examiner. “The president needs to make sure that the entire Cabinet, that all of the departments and agencies of the federal government, know that if the FEMA director asks for anything, by damn, give it to him…” 

This has got to be a joke right?

I mean this guy cannot seriously come out of the woodwork to criticize this President over his response to this disaster? Can he?

As I mentioned in my previous post on Friday President Obama immediately signed the Louisiana Disaster Declaration which provided REAL support for those victimized by the flooding, and he is planning to visit on Tuesday.

As has also been reported the Governor of Louisiana asked the President to wait: 

“It is a major ordeal, they free up the interstate for him,” Gov. John Bel Edwards (D) told MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow on Thursday. “We have to take hundreds of local first responders, police officers, sheriffs, deputies and state troopers to provide security for that type of visit.” 

“I would just as soon have those people engaged in the response rather than trying to secure the president,” Bel Edwards continued. “So I’d ask him to wait, if he would, another couple weeks.”

As he said the Governor would really prefer that the President wait a few weeks longer, but unfortunately there is now so much political pressure being applied that if Obama does not visit soon the Republicans will find some way to make this Hillary's fault and use it against her in campaign ads.

By the way for those of you who may have forgotten, or are too young to remember, THIS is why Michael Brown's criticisms are laughable.

If that had been me I would NEVER have shown my face in public again.

Ted Nugent posts video of black man striking another man, and claims it depicts slain teenager Michael Brown in attempt to smear his name and the Black Lives Matter movement.

So on Nugent's Facebook page you can find this video of a black man, purported to be Michale Brown, striking another man from behind and then beating him and robbing him. It is quite terrible to be sure.

Nugent reposted the above video and then added his own comments as well:  

ALL LIVES MATTER but not to devilscum. If black lives matter then let us pray that blacks stop killing raping & destroying their own. Soulless pathetic punks. Here's the gentle giant of Ferguson in action. The world is clealy better off without such vicious devils.

The problem of course is that the man in the video is NOT Michael Brown. Which Snopes made clear back in December of 2014.

Several of Nugent's own visitors also pointed out that it was not Michale Brown as well: 

Eric Burchfield That's not Mike Brown.

Steven Krueger Ted, I love ya brother..but this is not Mike Brown Keep it real by keeping it true brother

To which Nugent responded as follows:

Ted Nugent doesnt have to be mikey. devilpunks are all the same

Many of Nugent's supporters also did not seem to care who it depicted, the fact was that black people were thugs and therefore their lives don't matter:

Kort Kelley Michael Brown got what he deserved! 

Leah Benyo-Bell He was and is Fucking scum! One less asshole to worry about!! 

Chip Morgan Michael Brown was a low life punk...not because he was black but because he was a low life punk....he got what he deserved. 

Jonah Dosher Why can't we just hunt these animals? I feel worse for Cecil, and I don't think that was wrong. Lol 

Yeah see to Nugent and his racist supporters it really doesn't matter that this is not Michael Brown.

What matters is that it shows a black man violently assaulting another man, ipso facto Micheal Brown deserved to die.

Facebook page supporting police posts fake memorial mocking the death of Michael Brown.

Courtesy of The Free Thought Project: 

 One of the largest police pages on Facebook posted an extremely divisive picture, which is sure to inflame already fragile police-community/race relations in Ferguson, Mo. and beyond. 

Surprisingly, the fake picture has received a large amount of blowback from law enforcement officers, despite the thousands of repugnant cops who liked and shared it. 

The irresponsibility of a page that claims to represent and support cops, in posting something so shallow and disrespectful, regarding someone killed by an officer, shows a supreme ignorance and continual lack of understanding, regarding community relations and dealing with the public. 

You can visit the Facebook page for yourself here, And if you look through it you will quickly learn that it features many insensitive and even racist posts.

By the way it appears that cops are now killing unarmed white teenagers now as well.

I guess that must be more of that American exceptionalism that I keep hearing so much about.

In wake of scathing DOJ report Ferguson police chief calls it quits.

Courtesy of the BBC:  

After a federal report alleged widespread racial bias in his department, the police chief of Ferguson, Missouri, has agreed to resign. 

Ferguson came under investigation after a white police officer killed an unarmed black teenager in August, sparking weeks of unrest. 

Several other Ferguson officials have stepped down in wake of the report. 

US authorities have vowed to reform the force, possibly dismantling it. 

Thomas Jackson had resisted calls from protesters and some state leaders to step down, after the shooting of Michael Brown and the weeks of demonstrations that followed. 

The city said it would be giving Mr Jackson a severance payment and would pay for his health insurance for one year.

The resignation is effective on March 19th, you can read his resignation letter here.

Well finally some change is coming to Ferguson, Missouri. Too bad it took the death of an unarmed eighteen year old to make it happen.

Bar complaint filed against Ferguson grand jury prosecutor Bob McCulloch. About damn time!

Courtesy of CBS St. Louis:  

A bar complaint against St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorney Bob McCulloch and Assistant Prosecuting Attorneys Kathi Alizadeh and Sheila Whirley has been filed regarding the handling of the Ferguson grand jury. 

Attorney and former judge James R. Dowd and attorney Robert Ramsey reviewed the grand jury transcript – including evidence, witness interviews and testimony – before a group of seven citizens and attorneys – led by Christi Griffin, founder of the Ethics Project – filed an 11-page complaint with the Office of the Chief Disciplinary Counsel in Jefferson City, Missouri. 

Griffin says the complaint focuses on more than 15 Rules of Professional Conduct the group believes were violated, including the following: 

- Presenting witnesses to the grand jury – including Darren Wilson – who McCulloch, Alizadeh and Whirley knew or should have known would make false statements, is not exhaustive. 

Under Missouri Supreme Court Rule, the Office of the Chief Disciplinary Counsel has the duty to investigate allegations of misconduct by lawyers and for prosecuting cases where the misconduct poses a threat to the public or to the integrity of the legal profession. It is the position of the complainants that McCulloch, Alizadeh and Whirley’s conduct have done both. 

- Presenting the grand jury with a legal instruction ruled unconstitutional for decades. 

- Mislabeling and misplacing evidence related to key witness Dorian Johnson.

 - Failing to provide specific charges to the jury after “dumping” on them thousands of pages of interviews and evidence the complainants cite as going above gross negligence.

Personally I hope this is only the beginning and that this guy not only loses his job but gets sued into bankruptcy.

A member of the Michael Brown grand jury is suing so that he can speak out about the case. And we should all hope he wins.

Courtesy of St. Louis Post-Dispatch:  

A member of the grand jury that declined to file criminal charges against former Ferguson Police Officer Darren Wilson in the death of Michael Brown sued St. Louis County Prosecutor Robert McCulloch Monday for the right to speak publicly about the proceedings. 

The suit says that the former juror, identified in court documents only as "Grand Juror Doe," wishes to speak out to challenge public misconceptions about the case and that speaking publicly could "contribute to the current public dialogue concerning race relations" that was sparked by the Aug. 9 fatal shooting. It hints that jurors were not unanimous in their decision. Doe also wants "to advocate for legislative change to the way grand juries are conducted in Missouri," the suit says, and more simply, be able to talk about the case "with close family members at home." 

..............

The plaintiff claims McCulloch's characterization of the grand jury's view of the evidence after they declined to indict Wilson was at odds with Doe's opinions of the case, that the public's understanding of the grand jurors' views is "not entirely accurate." 

The investigation of Wilson "had a stronger focus on the victim than in other grand jury cases," the suit says. The presentation of evidence and "the State's counsel to the grand jury" "differed markedly and in significant ways. . . from the hundreds of matters presented to the grand jury earlier in its term." The suit also claims the legal guidelines presented to jurors in applying facts of the case were "muddled and untimely" compared to other cases.

Well we all know that this gran jury case was fixed from the get go, so it would be really great to have the opportunity to hear what really happened behind the scenes. 

It might also be helpful to the Feds who are doing their own investigation.

Man kills two New York police officers execution style. Online postings indicate possible retaliation for deaths of Michael Brown and Eric Garner.

Courtesy of Fox News:  

The gunman who ambushed and murdered two NYPD officers as they sat in their squad car Saturday afternoon in Brooklyn vowed to kill police in a number of social media posts that vowed retaliation for the deaths of Michael Brown and Eric Garner, authorities said. 

Ismaaiyl Brinsley, 28, wrote on his Instagram account: "I'm putting wings on pigs today. They take 1 of ours, let's take 2 of theirs," hours before the killings, two city officials with direct knowledge of the case confirmed for The Associated Press. He used the hashtags Shootthepolice RIPErivGardner (sic) RIPMikeBrown. The post also included an image of a silver handgun and the message, "This may be my final post. The post had more than 200 likes but also had many others admonishing his statements. 

Police said Brinsley, who was black, approached the passenger window of a marked police car at approximately 2:45 p.m. local time and opened fire, striking Officers Rafael Ramos and Wenjian Liu in the head. The officers -- one Hispanic, one Asian -- were on special patrol doing crime reduction work in the Bedford-Stuyvesant section of Brooklyn. 

"They were, quite simply, assassinated -- targeted for their uniform," said Police Commissioner Bill Bratton during a news conference at Woodhull Medical Center, where the officers were pronounced dead Saturday evening. 

As you can see I linked to the Fox News report on this because I knew they would put the connection to Michael Brown and Eric Garner front and center. And that is going to be the focus from conservative outlets going forward.

It is quite appropriate to report on those connections of course, but we all know that Fox and their Right Wing counterparts are going to make sure to focus on the shooters ethnicity and the online postings to suggest that the peaceful protests that have been taking place in New York and other places around the country are partly responsible for this shooting.

After all that is what they do.

And this gunman, who did a terrible and inexcusable thing, provided them with an early Christmas gift that they can now exploit in order to suggest that cops are dealing with animals on the streets and it is understandable that occasionally they utilize too much force in response to the constant fear that they could be murdered at any moment.

MSNBC reported last night that St. Louis County Prosecutor Bob McCulloch put witnesses before the Ferguson grand jury that he KNEW were lying. WTF?

Click image to play video

Courtesy of Crooks and Liars:  

Certain witnesses who spoke before the grand jury investigating the Aug. 9 shooting of Michael Brown told obvious lies under oath, St. Louis Prosecuting Attorney Robert McCulloch said Friday. 

“Clearly some were not telling the truth,” he said during an interview on KTRS 550. He added that he's not planning to pursue charges against any lying witnesses. 

In his first extensive interview since the grand jury decided not to indict Ferguson Police Officer Darren Wilson, McCulloch said he had no regrets about letting grand jury members hear from non-credible witnesses. 

“Early on I decided that anyone who claimed to have witnessed anything would be presented to the grand jury,” McCulloch said. He added that he would've been criticized no matter his decision. 

During the interview, McCulloch referenced a woman who claimed to have seen the shooting. 

This “lady clearly wasn't present,” McCulloch said. “She recounted a story right out of the newspaper,” backing up Wilson's version of events.

Okay I am pretty sure that it is unethical to have witnesses provide testimony to a grand jury that you know are lying.

And I KNOW it is against the law to lie to the grand jury.

So why isn't anybody getting prosecuted over this?

I think that the prosecuting attorney should be disbarred and this woman thrown in jail. That to me seems obvious.

And then I would like somebody to call Hannity out for constantly using the ONE witness which supported his inner prejudice and his desire to find Darren Wilson guiltless.

The oft quoted "Witness 40" in the Michael Brown shooting trial turns out to be a racist ex-felon who was nowhere near the incident that day.

Courtesy of the Smoking Gun:  

The grand jury witness who testified that she saw Michael Brown pummel a cop before charging at him “like a football player, head down,” is a troubled, bipolar Missouri woman with a criminal past who has a history of making racist remarks and once insinuated herself into another high-profile St. Louis criminal case with claims that police eventually dismissed as a “complete fabrication,” The Smoking Gun has learned. 

In interviews with police, FBI agents, and federal and state prosecutors--as well as during two separate appearances before the grand jury that ultimately declined to indict Officer Darren Wilson--the purported eyewitness delivered a preposterous and perjurious account of the fatal encounter in Ferguson. 

Referred to only as “Witness 40” in grand jury material, the woman concocted a story that is now baked into the narrative of the Ferguson grand jury, a panel before which she had no business appearing. 

While the “hands-up” account of Dorian Johnson is often cited by those who demanded Wilson’s indictment, “Witness 40”’s testimony about seeing Brown batter Wilson and then rush the cop like a defensive end has repeatedly been pointed to by Wilson supporters as directly corroborative of the officer’s version of the August 9 confrontation. The “Witness 40” testimony, as Fox News sees it, is proof that the 18-year-old Brown’s killing was justified, and that the Ferguson grand jury got it right. 

However, unlike Johnson, “Witness 40”--a 45-year-old St. Louis resident named Sandra McElroy--was nowhere near Canfield Drive on the Saturday afternoon Brown was shot to death.

Witness 40 is of course the ONLY witness that Sean Hannity ever quotes, while he conveniently pretends that the other twenty or more witnesses do not exist.

Not at all surprising that he chose the one that is a fucking liar. 

For those who may have forgotten this is the graphic that shows the numerous inconsistencies among the witnesses.

I have a feeling that this Sandra McElroy is not the only "witness" to have perjured themselves before the Grand Jury.

I strongly encourage you to read the entire article. It is quite eye opening.

Former St. Louis police officer: Darren Wilson processed his own evidence after shooting Michael Brown. #Fergusonisnotover.

Courtesy of 3 Chics Politico: 

Redditt Hudson a former police officer with St Louis County police says Darren Wilson processed his own evidence. Reddit also says he was in the room when Ferguson police chief Tom Jackson told them, Darren Wilson had no knowledge of Michael Brown being involved in a store robbery before the encounter with Wilson.

Hudson also wrote a rather incredible piece for  the Washington Post about how being a cop taught him about racism within law enforcement.

I think Chris Hayes is one of the last television hosts still digging into Ferguson, for which I admire him greatly.

It seems since the Eric Garner situation hit the front pages, with incriminating video and everything, that the shooting of Michael Brown has been permanently pushed to the side.

And that is too bad, because in my opinion there is still much to learn about the Ferguson case, and it will never be uncovered now that most news outlets have moved on to the next hot story.

However Michael Brown remains dead, Darren Wilson remains free, and justice remains unserved. 

Darren Wilson did NOT know about the convenience store robbery when he confronted Michael Brown on the streets of Ferguson. Update!

Courtesy of the Daily Mail:  

In Wilson's now very public account of his encounter with Michael Brown and Dorian Johnson on August 9 he has claimed that he asked Brown and Wilson to move to the sidewalk rather than walk in the street. 

When they walked on, Wilson has repeatedly stated, he realized they matched the description of two suspects wanted in connection with the robbery of nearby Ferguson Market. A youth matching Brown's description had stolen a box of Swishers cigarillos. 

It was this realization, he stated, that caused him to reverse his vehicle and sparked the car-side confrontation that left Brown dead on the street with six bullets in his body. 

But the sworn testimony of Wilson's squad supervisor directly contradicts this account. 

Wilson's supervisor was the first officer to speak with the 28-year-old cop following the shooting. The men spoke before St Louis County Police had even been notified of the incident and before the medical examiner or investigating officers had arrived on the scene. 

At that time, the supervisor said:'He [Wilson] did not know anything about the stealing call.' 

When pressed by the attorney questioning him, the officer reiterated that Wilson, 'did not know anything'. 

Asked, 'He told you he didn't know about there being a stealing at Ferguson Market?' 

The officer responded, 'Correct.' 

Now this is a key fact because, number one it proves that Wilson was not responding to a person that he knew to be violent, and number two it proves that Wilson lied to the Grand Jury. 

And the part that I found particularly enlightening was that in fact Wilson could NOT have known about the robbery because the call came in AFTER the shooting had already taken place.

(Update: Okay somebody asked me how I know that the robbery call came in after the shooting. In point of fact I described that poorly. What I meant to say was that it was unlikely that other officers would be looking out for Brown as the responding officer only received the call after 11:54, which is immediately after the robbery took place. He then had to drive to the convenience, conduct his interview (At which time he received a more detailed description.) Brown was shot dead at 12:01 which means that quite literally this officer was probably in the process of conducting his investigation.  And as this was a low priority, unarmed, snatch and grab it is very unlikely that he called for assistance or put out an APB.)

And remember 15 witnesses said that Michael Brown was running away when Wilson started firing at him, and 16 said he had his hands up before the last bullets were fired.

I think at this point the Justice Department has no choice but to launch their own investigation.

This whole thing stinks like crazy.

All of the inconsistencies in the Michael Brown shooting witnesses in one graphic.

In case it will not enlarge, click here.

Mother Jones did some more expansive reporting on these troubling inconsistencies, as well as reminding us that 16 of the witnesses agreed that when he was shot Michael Brown had his hands up.

And that may be the most important point of all.

Josh Marshall of Talking Points Memo sums up why he finds it so hard to believe Darren Wilson's account of the shooting of Michael Brown.

Michael Brown's family at Thanksgiving dinner.

I just read Josh Marshall's editorial on the the Grand Jury decision and was struck by how closely his points mirrored my own.

Here are the main points I want to share courtesy of TPM:  

I'm going to set aside all the questions about just how far apart Wilson and Brown were when the fatal shooting occurred, the angle of Brown's body, whether his hands were up. Lots of people have parsed the evidence on that a lot more closely. Those points are technical and accounts are conflicting. 

It's Wilson's description of how the incident began that just does not ring true. To believe Wilson, you have to believe that Brown, an 18 year old, is stopped by a police officer on a street in broad daylight. The police officer is armed. He's in an SUV. And Brown's immediate reaction is to begun screaming and cursing him, physically attacking him and before long literally daring him to shoot him. 

Here's how Wilson's account unfolds: Wilson passes Brown and his friend Dorian Johnson and tells them to stop walking in the middle of the street. The two friends basically blow Wilson off at first and then when Wilson tells them again, Brown yells "fuck what you have to say." When Brown and Johnson ignore Wilson's request, he backs up his vehicle and turns to the left, slightly cutting them off. As Wilson begins to get out of his car, Brown says "What the fuck are you going to do about it" and slams the door shut on him. 

After this, Brown and Wilson scuffle with Brown leaning into the car striking Wilson and Wilson, still seated, defending himself. Wilson describes thinking through how to escape from Brown or which weapon to use against him before finally pulling his gun and saying "get back or I'm going to shoot you." 

At this point, Brown grabs Wilson's gun and says "you are too much of a pussy to shoot me." 

They scuffle. A shot goes off but neither is injured. Brown comes at Wilson again - another scuffle and another shot which apparently hits Brown in the finger. Brown runs off. It's after this that the fatal shooting takes place, with the various questions about how it happened. 

We all have our intuitive, experience-based sense of what's credible and what's not. I doubt Michael Brown was going to physically assault an armed police officer in broad daylight, sitting in his SUV, without any apparent provocation or mutually escalation. But what really puts it over the edge are Brown's alleged statements, as recounted by Wilson. None of them ring true from what we know about Brown.

After that Marshall goes on to describe the famous Michael Brown robbery of the convenience store, and the fact that he roughed up a clerk, which in the minds of many was all they had to see to write Brown off as deserving of his fate that day.

I know this because the video was exactly the reason that my brother decided to argue with me during OUR Thanksgiving dinner as to why Michael Brown deserved to be shot.

To our credit we remained fairly calm, but my brother was completely convinced that Brown "was looking for trouble" that day. And his theory was based solely on the video of Brown manhandling that much smaller convenience store clerk.

What I suggested to my brother was that he ignore that footage as it did not factor into Wilson's decision to shoot Brown. Even if Wilson knew of the robbery, which is still somewhat debatable, he certainly had not seen the footage and would have no visual in his head of how Brown bullied that clerk into letting him walk away with those cigarillos.

Instead I asked my brother if he thought that shooting to death an unarmed man for walking down the street seemed reasonable. At that my brother asked how the officer would know he was unarmed, and I said because when they were supposedly grappling for the officer's gun (Darren Wilson's version of events) Brown did not pull a piece of his own once Wilson shot at him.

My brother also seemed blissfully unaware that Brown had been shot at least six times, twice in the head. (My brother only knew of two shots even though he said that he had watched hours of footage on TV.)

One of my brother's arguments was that Wilson had no choice as Brown was much bigger. In response I reminded him that they were of almost equal height (Brown's 6 ft 5, to Wilson's 6 ft 4.)

"But he charged him," my brother said. I mentioned that such a claim was not consistent through all of the witness testimony, and that several had said that Brown was staggering toward him, NOT rushing him.

This went back and forth a few times, with me eventually informing my brother that how the Grand Jury decided on the indictment was also essentially unheard of and that it was also cause for concern by those demanding justice. 

My brother's a good guy, he really is. However his responses were a real education to me as to how people who were only minimally paying attention could come away firmly convinced of something that was not backed up by the facts.

By the way he got ALL of his information from CNN.

And yes we had a really nice dinner and plenty of reasonable conversation after that exchange.

George Stephanopoulos gets first interview with Darren Wilson after Grand Jury decision.

Courtesy of HuffPo:  

ABC News broke into scheduled programming Tuesday afternoon to give a brief preview of the interview. Stephanopoulos told viewers that he spent more than an hour with Wilson in a "secret location." He said Wilson told him that he is "sorry" for the death of Brown, but that he would not do "anything different" if he were to relive that day. "He does not think he could have done anything differently," Stephanopoulos said. 

"He says he did what he was trained to do. He has a clean conscience over his actions that day."

"He has a clean conscience over this actions that day." You know having a clean conscience after ending the life of another human being indicates a psychopath.

Even soldiers fighting in wars against individuals that are trying to kill them, do not usually say they have a clean conscience over the soldiers they have killed.

Even if you really feel you are justified that is a troubling way to put things.

And saying that he would not have done anything differently....well I don't even know what to do with that statement.

If you watch this tonight feel free to weigh in here to let us know what you think of Wilson during, and after the interview. I am interested to learn if it changes anybody's mind or not.

Showing side by side video of President Obama calling for peaceful protests alongside violence on the streets of Ferguson. Just Fox News things.

Courtesy of the You Tube site:

While President Obama delivered his response to the decision by the grand jury in Ferguson not to indict Officer Darren Wilson, Fox News offered a split screen view of events on the ground. At one particular moment, around 10:15 p.m. EST, as the president called for non-violent demonstrations, protestors could be seen attempting to turn over a police car.

You know you almost can't blame Fox. This is almost tailored made for their racist narrative.

Here is all of the evidence released by St. Louis County Prosecutor Robert McCulloch. There is a journal entry from Witness 40 that, if accurate, seems to explain how Michael Brown was shot in the top of the head. But then Witness 14 had a completely different take.

And here are Officer Darrell Wilson's "injuries."

As you can see he was really manhandled. Apparently by a toddler. Remember Michael Brown was six foot five, and weighed 289 lbs.(And by the way these pictures look much different than ones taken in another series of photos after the shooting.)

I will admit that there is a lot of contradictory evidence released by the Grand Jury, but it seems clear that there was a lot more credibility given to Wilson's version of events than to versions coming from other witnesses.

After reading through some of it I think that if I had been an African American living in Ferguson I might have been on the streets last night as well.

All eyes on Ferguson.

The Ferguson Grand Jury has released their findings and the decision is.......no indictment!

Courtesy of USA Today: 

A white police officer will not face charges for fatally shooting an unarmed black teenager in a case that set off violent protests and racial unrest throughout the nation, an attorney close to the case said Monday night. 

A St. Louis County grand jury declined to indict officer Darren Wilson, 28, for firing six shots in an August confrontation that killed 18-year-old Michael Brown, said Benjamin Crump, an attorney for the family. The decision had been long awaited and followed rioting that resembled war-zone news footage in this predominantly black suburb of St. Louis. 

"The jury was not inclined to indict on any charges,'' Crump said after being informed of the decision by authorities. Prosecutors scheduled an news conference to announce the decision.

I am surprised this leaked as I am still watching the official announcement on MSNBC. (Update: MSNBC has now also confirmed that there will be no indictment. And I heard that for myself as well.)

I am glad that I am not living in Ferguson tonight, I cannot imagine that this is going to go over very well with the community.

Update: Don't forget that this young man was shot in the top of his head. How that is considered a reasonable use of force is completely beyond me.

Update 2: The prosecuting attorney for St. Louis county, Bob McCulloch, quoted liberally from the autopsy report that the grand jury used in their deliberations. And of course the report indicated that Brown had been shot at close range in the thumb and that the following shots were delivered to the front of his body.

However the independent autopsy ordered by the family indicated quite the opposite: 

An independent autopsy report conducted on behalf of the family found that Brown had been shot at least eight times – six times from behind. Jerryl Christmas, one of the Brown family attorneys, said the results indicated there was no struggle.

This makes me wonder what Eric Holder's federal investigation might turn up.

Update 3: Well you knew this was coming:

Violent protests erupted in Ferguson, Mo., Monday night, shortly after a grand jury decided not to indict police officer Darren Wilson in the August shooting death of teenager Michael Brown. 

Demonstrators taunted police, shattered windows and vandalized cars. At least one police car was set on fire. Local police attempted to disperse a crowd with volley after volley of smoke bombs, pepper spray and bean bags. The protests escalated despite efforts by Brown's family, local authorities, activists and President Obama to tamp down unrest and anger. 

I understand their frustration, bu I don't see how this helps.

The city of Ferguson is requesting outlandish fees before handing records over to reporters investigating the shooting of Michael Brown. Now why does that sound familiar?

Courtesy of the AP:

Officials in Ferguson, Missouri, are charging nearly 10 times the cost of some of their own employees' salaries before they will agree to turn over files under public records laws about the fatal shooting of 18-year-old Michael Brown. 

Missouri's attorney general on Monday, after the AP first disclosed the practice, contacted Ferguson's city attorney to ask for more information regarding fees related to document requests, the attorney general's spokeswoman said. 

The move to charge high fees discourages journalists and civil rights groups from investigating the shooting and its aftermath. And it follows dozens of records requests to Ferguson under the state's Sunshine Law, which can offer an unvarnished look into government activity. 

The city has demanded high fees to produce copies of records that, under Missouri law, it could give away free if it determined the material was in the public's interest to see. Instead, in some cases, the city has demanded high fees with little explanation or cost breakdown.

Well that is outlandish, and I think with more public scrutiny the city will be forced to change these outrageous demands or risk attracting even more negative attention. Which at this time they can ill afford.

However as I was reading that I realized that I was suddenly having a case of deja vu.

And I am not the only one, as the AP reported a little further down the page:

Other governments also have demanded spectacular fees. During the 2008 presidential campaign, for instance, news organizations asked for emails belonging to former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, the former Republican vice presidential nominee. 

The Anchorage Press said officials at first wanted $6,500 in search fees, leading the newspaper to withdraw its request. Thousands of pages of those emails were ultimately provided to news organizations for about $725 in copying charges.

Oh hells yeah! Who could forget all of that hullabaloo back in the days before Palin finally threw up her hands and quit?

Remember how they quoted a price to the AP of over 15 million for the emails?

Ultimately of course the state had to cave to the pressure, but it certainly gave Palin and her minions plenty to time to redact anything that might have actually proven newsworthy.

I wonder if the city of Ferguson is taking a page from that same playbook?

Two new witnesses, two WHITE witnesses, have confirmed that Michael Brown was surrendering when shot to death by Ferguson police officer.

Courtesy of the St. Louis Post Dispatch:  

Among the claims that ignited the fury over the fatal shooting of Michael Brown were that Ferguson police Officer Darren Wilson chased the unarmed teen on foot, shot at him as he ran away, then fired a barrage of fatal shots after Brown had turned around with his hands up. 

Almost all of the witnesses who shared these accounts with media either knew Brown; lived at or near the Canfield Green apartments, where the shooting occurred; or were visiting friends or relatives there. 

But there were two outsiders who happened to be working outside at the apartment complex on Aug. 9 — two men from a company in Jefferson County — who heard a single gunshot, looked up from their work and witnessed the shooting. 

Both have given their statements to the St. Louis County police and the FBI. One of the men agreed to share his account with a Post-Dispatch reporter on the condition that his name and employer not be used. 

The worker, who has not previously spoken with reporters, said he did not see what happened at the officer’s car — where Wilson and Brown engaged in an initial struggle and a shot was fired from Wilson’s gun. 

His account largely matches those who reported that Wilson chased Brown on foot away from the car after the initial gunshot and fired at least one more shot in the direction of Brown as he was fleeing; that Brown stopped, turned around and put his hands up; and that the officer killed Brown in a barrage of gunfire.

The article goes on to say that the witness reports really do not  shine any new light on the incident, since they essentially reflect what other witnesses have already said.

However what is different is that these are two WHITE witnesses with no previous connection to the victim as reported by the Global Grind.

That means that this can no longer be framed as a black vs white incident, with the Right Wing news outlets inferring that the black folk are simply defending their own while getting back at the po po.

I think it is far past time for Officer Wilson to finally get charged and spend some time in the clink.

Police officer who shot Michael Brown was once part of a police force that was so racist it was disbanded.

Courtesy of the Washington Post:  

The small city of Jennings, Mo., had a police department so troubled, and with so much tension between white officers and black residents, that the city council finally decided to disband it. Everyone in the Jennings police department was fired. New officers were brought in to create a credible department from scratch. 

That was three years ago. One of the officers who worked in that department, and lost his job along with everyone else, was a young man named Darren Wilson. 

Some of the Jennings officers reapplied for their jobs, but Wilson got a job in the police department in the nearby city of Ferguson.

Certainly doesn't prove anything, but it is an interesting fact to notice and file away. 

Being a young impressionable police officer in a force that had such a difficult relationship with the African American community really cannot help but to have some impact on how you view black folks while on patrol.

Don't you think?

Here are the stories from four eyewitness to the Michael Brown shooting combined in one video. Listen to how similar the stories are to each other.

Now here's the other thing that has troubled me.

The police have said that Brown reached in through the window to attack the officer and to take away his gun.

But WHY would he do that?

All the officer was supposedly doing was telling the two men to get out of the middle of the street.

Even if Michael Brown suspected that the officer knew he had stolen some cigars, THAT is a misdemeanor and there is NO WAY that this young man is going to attack a police officer over swuch a petty crime.

So that whole scenario never made any sense to me.

What these witnesses describe, though absolutely horrendous, seems far more believable.