Skip to main content


Ben Stein is a failed economist, failed comedian, failed actor and now he is showing that he is a failure of recent history.  There is only one thing Ben Stein is good at and that is: pushing the failed rightwinged BS lies and distortions.

Take, for example, Stein's BS lie that he told to Steve Malzberg (as reported on DKos):

Stein finished by claiming that in Brown's case, as well as Trayvon Martin's, "it's the very large, so-called victim attacking the policeman who winds up dead."

"I mean if they didn't just, would not attack the policeman, if they would just talk to the policeman in a reasonable way instead of attacking the policeman, nobody would be dead," Stein said.

Ok, Ben Stupid-Stein, Trayvon Martin was not killed by a police officer.  Trayvon Martin was killed by a no good, worthless thug named: George Zimmerman.

So, "why" are the rightwingers pushing their "Oh god, those large black unarmed teenagers aren't really unarmed, cuz ... you know ... they're so big and black that they are the weapon."

ANSWER: Because, the rightwingers are pissed that Michael Brown was an unarmed teenager gunned down by Officer Darrel Wilson.

That's right, the rightwingers are so pissed that Michael Brown was unarmed that they are spreading BS lies so as to give the BS illusion that "hey, all 'big' black teenagers are always armed because those 'big' AND 'black teenagers are the weapon.;"

Ben Stein's fellow Rightwing nutcase, Linda Chavez rang the bell to pretend black teenagers are, in fact, weapons in and of themselves.

Let’s start with the “unarmed black teenager” mantra.  

Brown was 18 years old — an adult by all legal standards. He was also 6 feet 4 inches tall and weighed nearly 300 pounds.

~excerpt from Linda Chavez op-ed in Rupert Murdoch's New York Post.

"mantra" ... it's not a "mantra" it's called a fact you ignorant Murdoch employee!

It is complete BS and 100% bigoted to say that a "big" black teenager "is a weapon" just because he is "big" and "black"

But, to make matters worse, not only is Ben Stein taking up the BS rightwinged nutcase bigoted mantra that black teenagers are weapons so therefore no black teenager is ever really unarmed, he makes matters worse by lying about Trayvon Martin.

So, Ben Stein I say, read this and LEARN!

George Zimmerman shot and killed Trayvon Martin.  Detective Serino also told Zimmerman he had no authority to "stop" Trayvon - let alone kill - Trayvon.

DETECTIVE: you don’t have the authority to go ahead and do the stop legally. You follow, I mean.

ZIMMERMAN: Sure

DETECTIVE: You’re working under the color of an absolutely private citizen.

ZIMMERMAN: Yes.

DETECTIVE: And, but then again, we can make citizens’ arrests all day long. I mean, for felonies. Problem was that this child was not committing a felony at the time. He was just walking.

ZIMMERMAN: Yes.

Continue Reading
Entertainment Weekly is reporting that the Marin County Coronor’s office, the Sheriff’s office suspects the death to be “suicide due to asphyxia.”

TMZ is reporting

Williams was last seen alive at his house at 10 PM Sunday night. Williams went back to rehab last month to focus on his sobriety.  We're told alcohol was an issue. Williams struggled with cocaine and alcohol abuse in the early '80s but was sober for 20 years.
Three years ago one of my dear friends lost her 15 year old son to suicide.  I heard some say they think people who commit suicide are selfish, I disagree.  I do not think people who commit suicide are selfish.  I think they are in such extreme, intense pain that they cannot take their pain one more minute.  

May Robin Williams' soul, and all those who have died souls, rest in peace.

Discuss

Let me start by saying I'm glad Rep. Brenner & his wife pulled that disgusting, vile, hateful 'Sandy Hook Hoax' conspiracy theory from their blog even if it meant they got peeved at DKos in the process. The pathetic, and almost sad part, is that Rep Brenner did not pull it from his blog because it was a heinous attack against murdered 5 & 6 year olds and the adults who tried to save them.  

No.  

According to Rep. Brenner written statement, he and his wife pulled the story because too many people were attacking him, Rep. Brenner.

Yeeeah ... that's right

... they pulled it because poor, pitiful Rep. Andrew Brenner's "twitter timeline was blowing up" and too many messages were being left on his "statehouse office telephone" by 'activists' at Dailykos.

My wife — who created, runs and owns Brenner Brief News — took the article in question down, primarily because people were using it to smear me. She posted a statement in its place.

~ portion of Rep. Brenner's written statement: why 'Sandy Hook Hoax' conspiracy theory was pulled from his blog

Apparently, it never occurred to Rep. Brenner that he, and anyone else, who publishes a repugnant 'Sandy Hook Hoax' conspiracy theory geared to plant the seed that those children just faked being murdered and their parents were in faked-mourning so America and 'take ur guns away' deserves to be lambasted in hopes they see the error of their ways.

There is more after the orange squiggle but I'd like to take this time to say 'THANK YOU' to DailyKos founder Markos Moulitsas Zúniga!!!

Markos gives me & the rest of us on here a place where our voices can be heard and, as a result, we can rally together, network and get things done that we couldn't do alone. And, as usual, we had our work cut out for us in order to get Rep. Brenner to do the right thing and remove that vile story from his blog.

Continue Reading

First let me answer the question Brenner's blog asks: NO! Sandy Hook was not a hoax and you are one sick f'ck to publish that article on your blog.

The article on Ohio State Rep. Brenner's private blog has got to be one of the most disgusting articles I have ever read in my life. The title alone was enough to nauseate me and the content was much worse.

I did not copy/paste the entire piece of garbage because the website said I could only copy/paste 15% of it. But below are some of the vile and the blog link is here:

Wrongly dated AP photos include those of children allegedly killed in the event, and wrong date stamps for Google pages and searches. It also included photos of 26 young students at Devers Elementary School in York releasing balloons into the air in memory of the young children allegedly slain at Sandy Hook. Another photo shows a banner tied to a freeway overpass with the actual photo allegedly taken December 15, one day after the tragedy. But the actual photo appears to have been taken December 12th. It’s also interesting to note that the banner – while attached to the fence of a freeway overpass – cannot be seen by traffic because it is not on the outside of the fence facing traffic. It is on the inside of the fence on the opposite/far side of the road. Was it simply placed there for the photo and then taken down? It was also an AP photo.
To create an event like Sandy Hook takes tremendous planning. Even so, with the best of minds, things will come to light that at the very least cast a shadow over the truthfulness of said event. We haven’t even discussed what a sharpshooter Adam Lanza must have been to take out that many people in such a short amount of time.
If Sandy Hook was an artificially created and staged event to allow the government to use fear to gain the advantage over the 2nd Amendment, we can bet we will see more of these events over time. Why? Simply because the government has not gotten what it wants.
Though President Obama has stated he supports the 2nd Amendment, it is clear from his actions that he does not. The 2nd Amendment he supports is no 2nd Amendment at all.
All emphasis in the copy/paste were mine.

Like I said, this article is on Ohio State Rep. Andrew Brenner's private blog but it was written by Brenner Brief's Assistant Editor, Fred DeRuvo. I am trying to be fair here but the way I see it, even though it was written by Brenner Brief's editor, I hold Rep Brenner accountable for all the published content he and his wife allow to be published on their blog, including but not limited to this trash.

On Brenner's Brief Blog, they list 11 Assistant Editors and 43 Contributors. They put a disclaimer that says:

All contributors are independent, freelance contributors to Brenner Brief News, and BBN is not responsible for their posted content
.

Yeah, well, BBN might be "responsible" for the "content" from their contributors but they sure as hell are responsible for the content they allow to be published on their blog. As for Fred DeRuvo, Assistant Editor to BBN, the way I see it, BBN is certainly responsible for the content they allow him to publish on their blog.

That said, it it imperative for Rep. Andrew Brenner to tell us if he too thinks 'Sandy Hook was a hoax designed to advance gun control' -- and -- if Rep. Brenner does not think that then why is he allowing that vile garbage to be published on his family's blog: Brenner Brief News blog.

h/t Keepemhonest's diary
Discuss

 In an odd interview with F'cks News Bret Baier, Mark Rubio inadvertently admitted he may never be qualified to be President.  Not only that, but in answering Baier's question: "what would you do if you were President?" - Marko Rubio also highlighted that he has no idea what he is talking about, and no idea what he has already said regarding Syria.    

1) Rubio uses the words "someone else, hopefully" to acknowledge he may not ever be qualified to be president.

Rubio said. "We have to understand, if I had been in charge — or someone else, hopefully — " we'd have never gotten to this stage. So if we inherited this mess, which we have now, I think our obligation is to try to figure out what is the least worst option available to us because they're all bad. And part of that equation, I can't tell you right now until we go through that intelligence briefing tomorrow because one of the key questions we have to ask ourselves is, 'Who are these so-called moderates on the ground in Syria and are they even capable of taking control of the country and giving us a rational, secular, stable government?' That's a key question."
2) Notice: Rubio says he has no idea who, or what, the rebels in Syria are:
RUBIO: "the key questions we have to ask ourselves is, 'Who are these so-called moderates on the ground in Syria and are they even capable of taking control of the country and giving us a rational, secular, stable government?' That's a key question."
   However, it is that part of his comment where he acknowledges that he has no idea what he has previously said, and written about the rebels.

3) So, if Rubio has no idea "who" or "what" the rebels in Syria are then "who" wrote this for speech for Rubio?

May 31, 2012
RUBIO: "The greatest thing that we can do now is help the rebels and the Free Syria Army and the political branch of the resistance to organize themselves,"
4) Since Rubio has no idea who the rebels are, then who wrote this script for Rubio?
February 27, 2013
RUBIO: "What the opposition really needs is access to ammunition. And I think one of the things we can consider, if we can identify a couple of responsible groups — or more responsible groups that we feel have built capacity — ammunition is something we can provide. … And I think that’s a step I’m prepared to advocate for.”
Come on Rubio, tell us, who writes your shit -- cuz it sure as hell isn't you.
Continue Reading

    In an interview with Christi O’Connor, Shellie Zimmerman said that she and George got into a fight Saturday night, the night before he killed, Trayvon Martin, and that she left him and was staying at her father's house.  Shellie Zimmerman said she was still staying with her father on Sunday - the night of the killing of Trayvon Martin.

     That means George's dad, Robert Zimmerman Sr. lied when he was under oath and told the State Attorney that George had cooked Shellie dinner that night.

Time stamp 1:39
ROBERT ZIMMERMAN Sr.: George had cooked dinner for him and his wife and was going to the store. He goes to the store the same time every week.

~ Robert Zimmerman Sr, George Zimmerman's dad, while under oath


     If Robert Zimmerman is going to lie about George cooking dinner for Shellie that night, when she had moved out the night before, I do not believe him when he also swore under oath that it was George Zimmerman's voice screaming for help ... I don't believe it. So far all I've garnered from the George Zimmerman family is that they are pathological liars who enable their sociopathic son so much so that he killed an unarmed teenager.  

     Since there was none of George's DNA on Trayvon Martin's hands, fingers or sleeves, (see my previous diaries), I always wondered if Shellie had caused those "injuries" on George's head sometime before he found Trayvon ... now ... that I know Shellie and George had a fight so bad that she left home and moved in with her dad, I am beginning to believe she did cause those injuries to George's head on Saturday night.

 

Continue Reading

    Rand Paul is nothing more than a stooge for the GOP establishment who merely pretends to be anti-establishment, anti-big government bailout and anti-career politician when, in reality, Rand Paul's actions show he supports big government bailout, supports career politicians and wants to be part of the GOP establishment.

     In 2010, not many people noticed, but Rand Paul began publicly worshiping and stooging for the GOP Establishment just 24 days after he won the Kentucky Primary on May 18, 2010.   Currently, Rand Paul underscores that he is now a full-fledged stooge for the GOP Establishment with his endorsement of, and active campaigning for, Mitch McConnell against Tea Party candidate Matt Bevin in Kentucky's 2014 Senate Republican primary.  

    In fact, Rand Paul is so hot for the status-quo of the GOP Establishment, that he even got his very dear friend, Louisville, Kentucky Tea Party Leader Marilyn Parker, to be a stooge for the GOP establishment too as she has already published her very early endorsement for Mitch McConnell against the Louisville Tea Party Candidate Bevin.

     Amazing, Kentucky GOP Primary is a long 9 months away (May 2014) and so-called Kentucky Tea Party'ers, Rand Paul and Marilyn Parker, are so endeared to the GOP Establishment that they have already announced their endorsement of GOP Establishment Leader, Mitch McConnell.

Tea Party and Bank Bailouts
Rand Paul not really against bank bailouts

     Tea Party people allegedly loathe big government and loathe big government bailing out any industry because, they say, bailouts are unconstitutional.  In 2009, Rand Paul claimed that he hates bailouts because they are "unconstitutional" all GOP candidates should pledge to never accept money from any Senator who voted "yes" for the bank bailouts.

September 2, 2009: Kentucky media reported on Rand Paul's Press release:

Dr. Rand Paul’s U.S. Senate campaign said today that he will not accept donations from any senators that voted for the TARP bailouts. He called on his opponents to take the same pledge
    That BS pledge ended up being a Rand Paul Lie because in June 2010, (less than a year later) he let one of the authors of the Bank Bailouts, Mitch McConnell, throw him a Washington DC Fundraiser. (See details below the orange squiggle)

     Mitch McConnell not only voted for the bailouts, McConnell helped write the TARP Bill and took to the Senate floor to beg his conservative colleagues to vote "yes" for the TARP bill.
In 2008, on the Senate floor Mitch McConnell said:

So after extensive consultation between the majority leader and myself and the leaders in both parties here in the Senate, we believe we have crafted a way to go forward and to get us back on track.

~Mitch McConnell Senate Floor Speech, October 1, 2008

    Then, a year later, in October, 2009 Mitch McConnell told Politico reporters that his TARP Bill worked
The Troubled Asset Relief Program has “succeeded in stabilizing the banking system,”

~ Mitch McConnell to reporters

Tea Party and Term Limits for Congress
Rand Paul's actions shows he lied when he said he supports "term limits"

     In 2009, Rand Paul pretended and falsely claimed he supported a "term limit Amendment" to the Constitution.  On November 1, 2009, Rand Paul campaigned alleged that 80% of both Democrats and Republicans support "term limits" for members of Congress so naturally, after that type of polling, Rand Paul got on the "term limit" bandwagon and Rand's campaign posted this:

More than 95% of incumbent politicians win re-election to the US Congress. Incumbents win re-election at a higher rate than they did in the Soviet Politburo.

With each successive term, politicians grow more and more distant from the people. It is hard to understand the plight of ordinary citizens when Congressman make over $170,000 per year, have health care benefits worth another $15,000 and become fully vested in a lucrative pension plan within a few years.

Some pundits like to remark that we already have term limits they’re called “elections.” This glib response ignores the fact that incumbent US Senators start each election cycle with an average of $8 million dollars in the bank. The average US Representative starts with over $1 million in the bank.

Most of this incumbent cash comes in the form of $5000 checks from special interest groups that want federal contracts or federal favors.

Long term incumbency leads to politicians who seem to care more about what is best for their career than what is best for their country.

I hope you will help both the Term Limits movement and the country by supporting my campaign for the US Senate.

    ... "by supporting my campaign for US Senate" WTF?  Why Rand? So that 3 years later you, Rand Paul, can endorse and actively campaign for "long term" incumbent Mitch McConnell.

     November 11, 2009 Rand Paul Campaign issued this "Term Limit" announcement:

Rand Paul endorses Term Limits Amendment

Rand Paul supports term limits as a means of reining in career politicians and pork barrel spending. He supports the legislation introduced by U.S. Senate Republicans Jim DeMint, Tom Coburn, Kay Bailey Hutchinson, and Sam Brownback to amend the Constitution to limit terms.

“Billions of dollars flow to states like West Virginia and Alaska based on seniority and not based on any objective value of the projects. Term Limits would put a stop to this pork barrel system,” Rand Paul said. “Senator DeMint’s point that the rule only works when applied to everyone makes a lot of sense to me.”

“More needs to be done to break up some the concentrated power in the bureaucracy, but this is a good start toward tearing out political corruption by the roots,” Paul said

     ... says the person who endorsed and campaigns for Mitch McConnell.

      Rand Paul made several other claims where he pretended to support term limits.  Rand Paul's campaign website:

RAND PAUL: "Term limits would reverse some of the earmarking process, some of the pork barrel projects that are based on seniority, if you brought people home. It’s a big contrast in the Republican primary between me and my opponent. My opponent is a career politician who looks forward to the rest of his life in Washington D.C. if he can get there.”

~Rand Paul December 4, 2009

     Rand Paul put this "term limit" mantra in a different section of his campaign website:
Rand Advocates Term Limits and Property Rights

Rand Paul’s efforts for governmental reform have met with an overwhelmingly positive reception while traveling around the state, getting an especially enthusiastic response at Tea Parties.

To expand on recent coverage by Joseph Gerth of the Courier Journal, Rand favors twelve year term limits for both representatives and senators.

    .... ummm Mitch McConnell has been in the Senate for 29 years (which is 17 years longer than the 12 years Rand pretended to want to "reform)

      Rand Paul is full of crap and was lying about supporting term limits which is evidenced by the fact that he has already endorsed career politician, pork barrel spender Mitch McConnell.

       Ok, so now we see that Rand Paul lied like a rug with his fake Term Limit support, in 2009.  But in 2009, during Rand Paul's primary campaign, he claimed to be anti-establishment, anti-TARP, anti-bank bailout ... but ... was he really?

     The answer is "no" Rand Paul was not and is not against the GOP Establishment and, as a result, Rand Paul is not against what he calls, big government.  

... and that is why Rand Paul and Marilyn Parker are endorsing and actively campaigning for big government, GOP Establishment Leader Mitch McConnell against Tea Party candidate Matt Bevin.

     Oh yeah, I know, some people say Mitch McConnell is getting cozy with Rand Paul so as to get the Tea Party voters in his own Primary election and that is most likely true.  However, it seems to me, Rand Paul was GOP Establishment Stooge-In-Training as early as 24 days after he won the GOP Primary in Kentucky.

Continue Reading

Fri Aug 16, 2013 at 10:00 AM PDT

RNC just nailed the GOP coffin shut

by cc

Remember Sarah Palin?

2008 Election:
When Palin failed miserably in interviews, the RNC and GOP decided Palin would only be allowed to sit down with rightwinged Fox anchors.  Even the GOP knew Sarah Palin was, and is, a buffoon.  

So, as it turned out, the GOP 'bet' that they could avoid letting the voters see how ignorant and batshit crazy Sarah Palin is by keeping her away from the media and the GOP lost, by a landslide in 2008.

2012 Election:
Because of the "strategy" the GOP used with Sarah Palin, during the 2012 election cycle many people were wondering if the far rightwinged candidates would allow interviews with media other than Fox.  Even so-called "moderate" Mitt Romney avoided all media as long as he could.

Daily Beast wrote with snark:

It wouldn’t be fair to say that Mitt Romney is hiding from the national media, exactly. Why, on Thursday morning he went on Fox & Friends, fielding such tough questions about his challenge to President Obama as: “You’re beating him with independents. How are you going to outdo him in that department?”

~April 2012

Politicususa wrote
Mitt Romney has had a long standing policy of avoiding the media at all costs. He broke with this to do a few interviews during his summer gaffe-filled diplomacy gone wrong tour, but he only allowed 6 questions in pressers during his entire tour.

~October 2012

Romney, along with the GOP, thought they could keep Romney's batshit crazy, anti-American worker, anti-women, anti-minority, platform hidden from voters so long as the media was not allowed to ask Romney questions.  

Once again, on election night, by 9:00 PM EST the GOP lost, by a landslide.

2016 Elections:
Republican National Committee just voted, unanimously, to nix NBC and CNN from being GOP debate hosts for the 2016 presidential election -- yeah, cuz that strategy worked out so well for them with Sarah Palin, Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan.

Continue Reading

Rep. Paul Wieland filed a personal lawsuit against the Federal Government stating, "I see abortion-inducing drugs as intrinsically evil, and I cannot in good conscience preach one thing to my kids and then just go with the flow on our insurance.  In their lawsuit, Wieland and his wife are declaring that abortion is against their "religion." However, Wieland's State taxpayer paid health insurance carrier, does not require he have coverage for any "abortion-inducing drugs" making him out to be a liar, at least to the press, about why he is suing the Federal Government.

From his insurance carrier:

"Coverage for contraceptives either at no charge or at the same level of deductible, coinsurance or copayment as any other drug. Contraceptives are defined as prescription drugs and devices approved by the FDA for use as a contraceptive. Coverage is not required for drugs and devices that are intended to induce abortion."

~Missouri Consolidated Health Care Plan.

Rep. Paul Wieland, who has 3 daughters, told the press:
“I see abortion-inducing drugs as intrinsically evil, and I cannot in good conscience preach one thing to my kids and then just go with the flow on our insurance. This is a moral conundrum for me. Do I just cancel the coverage and put my family at risk? I don’t believe in what the government is doing."

~Rep. Paul Wieland (R)

Mrs. Paul Wieland told the press:
"As parents of three daughters, the Federal Government and MCHCP are denying us our ability to raise our children in accordance with our faith. We are role models to our daughters. Therefore my husband and I refuse to condone, whether through financial support or through access in our healthcare, abortion inducing drugs, sterilizations or contraceptives."
I don't know why Rep. Paul Wieland and his wife are lying about what his Health insurance plan is mandating "abortion-inducing drugs" -- but they are lying.
Continue Reading

    Two of the so-called "journalists" at NBC News Division, Chuck Todd and Andrea Mitchell, want NBC News to censor NBC Entertainment Division.

      NBC Entertainment is apparently planning on making a 4-hour mini-series about Hillary Clinton.  NBC Entertainment Chairman Robert Greenblatt said of Hillary Clinton: "She's not going to probably declare for another two years, so this could well have aired before that."

     Chuck Todd has said that such a 4-hour mini-series would be "a total nightmare for NBC News" and Andrea Mitchell said, "A lot of news people would say, including the MSNBC news people and Chuck Todd and all the rest of us, a really bad idea given the timing."  The timing?  WTF?  Did Mitchell not read what Robert Greenblatt said about the "timing?"

     I have a couple of questions for Mitchell and Todd:

1) Did either, or both, of the them receive any phone calls from GOP members of Congress threatening that they (GOPers) would never speak to them again unless they publicly call for censorship of NBC Entertainment division?  

If the answer is "yes" then that is news and should be reported.

2) Do either, or both, of them think NBC News should not only censor NBC Entertainment's productions but also censor NBC programs like Saturday Night Live?

3) Are Andrea Mitchell and Chuck Todd bitching about NBC Entertainment's programming because they are afraid that all the congressional ass kissing they've been doing over the years will be interrupted?

     It is my opinion that Ben Franklin rolls over in his grave when so-called journalist, like Chuck Todd and Andrea Mitchell, suck up to members of Congress to such a degree that they are no longer able to report factual news but instead spout slanted news.  

     Chuck Todd proclaims on his twitter feed that he is a "Political Junkie."  Someone should tell Chuck Todd that being a "Political Junkie" does not make a person a journalist just like being a Heroin Junkie does not make a person a pharmacist.

     

Continue Reading

DNA results and Autopsy results would have to "prove" that Trayvon Martin actually "caused" Zimmerman's injuries in order for for anyone, including a jury, to conclude Zimmerman acted in self defense when he killed an unarmed Trayvon Martin.  However, the DNA results and the Autopsy results do not support Zimmerman's claim that Trayvon Martin "caused" injuries to his face or head.  Meaning, DNA results and the Autopsy suggest Trayvon Martin is not the "cause" of Zimmerman's injuries. So Zimmerman's alleged self defense claim might not fly with the jury since none of the forensic results suggest Trayvon Martin touched Zimmerman in any way, shape or form.

The Jury will see the DNA report shows that none of Zimmerman's DNA was under Martin's fingernails.  
George Zimmerman was damn near bald on the night he followed, search for, then found and killed Trayvon Martin.  In order for Trayvon Martin to grab Zimmerman's bald head tight enough to slam his head into the sidewalk over a dozen times, some of Zimmerman's DNA would have gotten underneath Trayvon Martin's fingernails.

The DNA results show none of Zimmerman's DNA under Martin's fingernails:

RESULTS
Exhibit ME2:  Fingernail scrapings represented as being from Trayvon Benjamin Martin
                   “gave chemical indications for the presence of blood”

ME 2A Right hand: “No DNA results foreign to Trayvon Benjamin Martin (ME-3) were
                          found on Exhibit ME-2A”

ME 2B Left hand:  “No DNA results were obtained from Exhibit ME-2B

The Jury will see the DNA report shows that none of Zimmerman's DNA was found on the cuffs/sleeves of Martin's hoodie.
George Zimmerman told detectives (time 34:46 in video after the orange squiggle) that he had "blood all over [his] face and eyes."  We know from pictures officer's took of Zimmerman moments after he killed Trayvon that Zimmerman did not really have blood covering his eyes.  That said, if Trayvon had been punching Zimmerman in the nose 25 to 30 times, as Zimmerman claims, then some of Zimmerman's blood would be all over the cuff/sleeve of Trayvon Martins hoodie.  
Exhibit ME 12 Hoodie represented as being from Trayvon Martin

Stain A:
     Partial DNA profile consistent with originating from a male individual and matches the DNA profile from Trayvon Benjamin Martin (ME-3).”

Stain B: (cuff/sleeve regions of both arms)
     Failed to give chemical indications for the presence of blood

Right cuff/lower sleeve:
    No DNA results foreign to Trayvon Martin were obtained from right cuff/lower sleeve

Left cuff/lower sleeve:
    No DNA results foreign to Trayvon Martin were obtained from left cuff/lower sleeve

ME 12 (stain B and general rubbing from cuff/sleeve regions of both arms)
    Failed to give chemical indications for the presence of blood

Stain C:
     No DNA results were obtained.

The Jury will see the DNA report that states that none of Zimmerman's DNA was found on the right cuff/sleeve of Trayvon's long sleeve shirt and no determination could be made if Zimmerman's DNA was present on the left cuff/sleeve Trayvon wore underneath his hoodie because the sample size was too small to yield sufficient results.
ME 8  Shirt represented as being from Trayvon Martin

Right cuff/lower sleeve:
     Failed to give chemical indications for the presence of blood. No DNA results foreign to Trayvon Martin (ME-3) were obtained from Exhibit ME-8 right cuff/lower sleeve

Left cuff/lower sleeve:
     The mixed DNA profile obtained from Exhibit ME-8 left cuff/lower sleeve demonstrated the presence of at least two individuals.  Assuming Trayvon Benjamin Martin (ME-3) is a contributor to the mixture, foreign DNA results were obtained.  Due to the limited nature of these results, this data is insufficient for inclusion purposes.

      No determination can be made regarding the possible contribution of George Michael Zimmerman (JR-2) to the mixed DNA profile obtained from Exhibit ME-8 left cuff/lower sleeve.”

The Jury will see Trayvon Martin's Autopsy Report that describes, in intricate detail, the physical appearance of Trayvon Martin as he appeared after Zimmerman killed him.  The Jury will see that the Autopsy report shows Trayvon had "a 1/4" x 1/8" small abrasion on the left fourth finger."  The Jury will also see that the Autopsy does not mention any: blood, dirt, defensive wounds or offensive wounds on Trayvon Martin's knuckles, palms, wrists, fingers or thumbs -- which dispels Zimmerman's claim that Trayvon punched him in the nose 25-30 times, covered his nose and mouth while at the same slamming his head into the sidewalk over a dozen times.

The Jury will see Police pictures of George Zimmerman's hands approximately 45 minutes after he killed Trayvon which do not show any defensive wounds on his, dirt or blood on Zimmerman's: knuckles, palms, wrists, thumbs or fingers or fingernails.

The Jury will also see police pictures of the back-side of Zimmerman which does not show any: blood, dirt, mud, or grass stains on the back of Zimmerman's jacket or blue jeans.

In the video below the orange squiggle, at time 33:31, Zimmerman's admitted to Detectives that he pinned Trayvon Martin "face down" in the muddy, wet grass, in an effort to "restrain" the unarmed teenager he just killed.

ZIMMERMAN: I was on top of him, straddling him, he was face down, when he kept hitting me in the face it felt like something was in his hands, so I thought he had a weapon, so I grabbed his hands and pushed them away from his body, and I said, "STOP! Don't move." He was saying something like "ahhhh ahhhhh and cursing" and I said, "STOP, don't move" and then somebody came and had a flashlight and I thought was a cop and I said - oh and I still had my gun in my hand as I was holding his hands apart and I said are you a cop he said "no" but I'll call them.  I said, "I don't need you to do that I need you to help me restrain this guy."
Zimmerman admission that he pinned Trayvon Martin face down, holding Trayvon's arms out away from his body could explain: Photographs that show the front-side of Trayvon Martin's pants and hoodie have: dirt, mud, and grass stains on them.

There is no denying that the EMS Report states Zimmerman had "minor bleeding" from wounds.  Officer Wagner took pictures with his cell phone before EMS cleaned Zimmerman with Peroxide that show: the very tip of Zimmerman's nose had some blood that dripped down in a narrow band onto his mustache (but no bleeding from nostrils).  There is also a picture Wagner took before EMS cleaned Zimmerman that shows Zimmerman with "minor bleeding" (no smeared blood plus blood flowing to the front of Zimmerman's chin) on the back of his head.

That said, the DNA Report and Autopsy Report suggests that Trayvon Martin did not cause any of the injuries to Zimmerman.  How did Zimmerman get his injuries?  Who knows, but the DNA evidence and Autopsy report suggests Zimmerman did not get his injuries from the hands of Trayvon Martin.

CORRECTION:
Zimmerman admitted to Detectives that when he found Trayvon Martin he immediately took his own Zimmerman took his own right hand and tapped his right front pants pocket and his right back pocket (which was just inches away from his firearm) and said he "went to go for my phone" and then admitted that his phone was not even in his pants.  The other day in my Diary I wrote he put his hand in his right-side jacket pocket and that is not correct.
I wanted to make that correction here for anyone who may have read my Diary from yesterday.
Continue Reading

Zimmerman was not merely "following" Trayvon, rather he was searching for Trayvon with malice against Martin of whom he had already described as an "asshole" prior to Trayvon Martin "running" away from Zimmerman. While actively searching for Trayvon, Zimmerman called Trayvon a "Fucking Coon, Goon or punk. After Zimmerman killed Trayvon Martin, we learned through his interviews with detectives and his written statement that, before, during and after Zimmerman's searched for and found Martin, in Zimmerman's mind that night Trayvon was "the unarmed, asshole, teenage, punk, suspect" who "vandalizes neighborhoods" who needed to be "restrained" even after Zimmerman killed him.

I think Zimmerman's state-of-mind before, during and after he searched for and found Trayvon Martin shows that Zimmerman "precipitated the confrontation" with Martin which makes Zimmerman the aggressor. By that I mean, Zimmerman willfully, knowingly and with forethought provoked a conflict and created the circumstances that directly lead to his use of deadly force against Martin and that is not justifiable homicide (self defense).  I think the evidence shows Zimmerman exacerbated the circumstances that lead to his use of deadly force against Martin by not identifying himself to Martin along with reaching into his pants pocket to get his 'cell phone' (that he admitted later was not even in his pants pocket) when he found and ultimately killed Trayvon.

Malice, in the legal sense, is defined as:
malice n. a conscious, intentional wrongdoing either of a civil wrong like libel (false written statement about another) or a criminal act like assault or murder, with the intention of doing harm to the victim. This intention includes ill-will, hatred, or total disregard for the other's well-being.
Here are some facts that are in evidence that I believe indicate Zimmerman was acting with malice (ill-will and disregard for the other's well being) as he searched for Trayvon:

1. He thought Travyon was in his late teens and cursed when Trayvon started "running" away from him.

2. He told Detectives he never thought Trayvon had a firearm.

3. He told Detectives he was never scared of, nor intimidated by Trayvon, while Zimmerman was "monitoring" and "following" Trayvon by car.

4. Zimmerman told Detectives that when he was in his car, his state-of-mind was that Trayvon as an "unarmed" "punk" who "victimizes neighborhoods."

5. At the very second Trayvon started "running" away from Zimmerman, he grabbed two flashlights and had his loaded weapon with one in the chamber with no external safety feature down his pants searching for the unarmed "asshole" teenage "punk" who was "running" away from Zimmerman.

6. Zimmerman told detectives he "forgot" he was carrying his loaded weapon with one in the chamber and no external safety mechanism.

7. Zimmerman told detectives after he 'shot' Trayvon, he held on to his loaded firearm as he got on top Trayvon's back to restrain Trayvon until officers arrived.

8. Zimmerman told detectives he fell down on to his back as soon as Trayvon allegedly punched him the first time.

9. Zimmerman's state-of-mind: in written statement he wrote that 911 Dispatch told him not to follow Trayvon.

10. Detectives told Zimmerman he had no authority to monitor Trayvon Martin that night.  Sanford Police Department did not authorize Zimmerman to "follow" Trayvon Martin.

11. Detectives told Zimmerman that Trayvon Martin had a legal right to defend himself against Zimmerman

12. Zimmerman refers to Trayvon Martin as "the suspect" throughout his entire written statement

13. Zimmerman wrote in a statement that Trayvon Martin "saw his exposed fire arm."

It is not "illegal" to follow people, it might not even be illegal to search for someone who is not committing a crime but who is running away from you -- maybe that's why predators search for their prey in public.  

Some people say if Martin threw the first punch then Zimmerman has a "self defense" claim because that would somehow 'mean' Martin "confronted" Zimmerman.  Which I disagree with, in part, because Martin already proved he did not want any type of confrontation with Zimmerman when he employed the "duty to retreat" and started "running" away from Zimmerman.  Some people may think that a predator who is searching for their prey, when their prey started "running" away from them, that the prey has no right to try fight their way out of the situation prior to the predator touching them but that is not what FBI agents imply:

Kick, bite, and no matter what the threat, do not go along with your kidnapper. Once he takes you away, your chances of survival greatly diminish. Yell, scream, fight and run from any potential abductor.
- Clint Van Zandt, a former FBI profiler and hostage negotiator 2009
People have a right to defend themselves from the threat of physical injury when a predator, they have already started "running" away from, searches for them and finds them.  In Trayvon Martin's case, any belief that Zimmerman meant to cause physical harm to Trayvon was reasonable given the fact that Trayvon knew Zimmerman was following him by car and then searched for and found him after he started "running" away from Zimmerman.  Which goes back to Zimmerman precipitated the confrontation and provoked a conflict and created the circumstances that directly lead to his use of deadly force against Martin.

Trayvon Martin had no way of knowing what Zimmerman wanted because when Zimmerman found him, he admits, he never identified himself.  And, when he found Martin, Zimmerman also admits he started "reaching in his pants pocket to get" his cellphone (which he later admitted was not in his pants pocket and which he never got out.)  For all Trayvon knew, Zimmerman was a potential abductor who was reaching in his pocket for his gun and who was going to try to rape him.  Maybe Trayvon was "running" away from him because he thought Zimmerman was a predator who meant to harm him.  I do not think the law allows a predator to search for their prey and at the same time does not allow the prey to fight like hell to get away from a predator and if there is such a law giving predators that much control over the prey they are searching for, I would like it if someone would cite that law for me.

If Martin did punch Zimmerman, and I do not think the Autopsy Report supports that, but if he did, then that means Trayvon Martin followed the advice of the FBI Agent who said: run from and fight your potential abductor.

We know from Zimmerman's 911 call that Trayvon Martin was not committing any crime and he saw Zimmerman was following him. So, rather than "stand his ground" Martin willfully, knowingly and with forethought started "running" away from him.  It was at that moment, Zimmerman willfully, knowingly and with forethought grabbed two flashlights, had his loaded firearm with one in the chamber and no external safety feature to search for the "unarmed, teenage, punk, suspect," who "vandalizes neighborhoods" and who was running away from him.  

Martin's actions show he was trying to avoid a confrontation whereas Zimmerman actions show he provoked a conflict and created the circumstances that directly lead to his use of deadly force against Martin.

That said, Zimmerman's "state-of-mind" before, during and after he searched for Trayvon and killed Trayvon is important:
To Zimmerman, Trayvon Martin was "the suspect."  In criminal law, a suspect is someone who is under suspicion, often formally announced as being under investigation by law enforcement officials.  Therefore, evidence shows that before and during his search for Trayvon that night, Zimmerman's state-of-mind was that Trayvon was an: "unarmed, asshole, teenage punk, suspect" who "victimizes neighborhoods"   who needed to be "restrained" even after Zimmerman killed him.

To me, just looking at that evidence alone shows Zimmerman searched for and killed Trayvon Martin out of malice.  And it is that malice from Zimmerman that "precipitated the confrontation" which resulted in dragging Trayvon into an altercation.

Continue Reading
You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.

RSS

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site