An elected member of Congress can be censured for spreading extreme misinformation, and making statements deemed “conduct unbecoming” of the Chamber. There can hardly be more harmful misinformation than continuing to give credence to a deadly lie that led to millions in property damage, violent riots and the deaths of several individuals. Moreover, a Representative can be successfully sued for defamation, which Tlaib’s tweet is by definition. As a matter of fact and law, Mike Brown was not murdered. The only reason ex-police officer Darren Wilson will not sue Tlaib is because the “Hands Up! Don’t Shoot!” lie…Here’s CNN at its best…
…destroyed his career and life. He lives in seclusion, surrounded by security cameras, and is terrified of being murdered by people who believe race-hucksters like Rashida Tlaib.
As for NPR…anyone who argues that the government should still be funding this propaganda organ is almost as reprehensible as the network is. That first sentence feeds into the “Hands Up! Don’t Shoot!” fiction that Brown was a promising young student on his way to a productive career rather than a dangerous bully who had just intimidated and robbed a shop owner shortly before trying to grab Officer Wilson’s gun.
Brown’s killing isn’t what sparked the riots: his resisting arrest and attacking an officer did, with the accelerant of his accomplice’s lies and the gullible media’s eagerness to demonize the police. NPR has the gall to repeat the “dead body lying on the street” trope, used to show the police’s disregard for black victims, when Brown lay in the street because it was a crime scene, and for once officers didn’t destroy potential evidence by acting impulsively. Then we get “the official report”—implying a cover-up—neatly leaving out that this was Barack Obama’s race-obsessed Justice Department’s report and that it was desperate to find some way to indict Wilson and thrill Obama’s many anti-white racist acolytes.
Watching Boston stations lately to follow the streaking (and streaky) Red Sox, I have seen one Democratic candidate’s campaign ad after another. They all refer broadly to “Trump’s lies.” Not one of Trump’s “lies”—they are never specified– has been as destructive as the one Tlaib and Black Lives Matter are keeping alive. When I hear Democrat leadership confront that lie effectively, I will view the complaints of Democrats about President Trump as having slightly more integrity.
Confronting Tlaib’s lie effectively means censoring her and forcing her to retract it.
You know they never will. They love that lie.
Ethics Alarms 
This situation inspires one to wonder what do those perpetuating this incredibly damaging lie receive to doing so. After a bit of thinking, it occurs to me the damage is reward. These people want to deconstruct or outright destroy our society. They are enemies, not political opponents with differing views on how to make America better. They want to end America and become tyrants over us using mob rule.
I am left only with the hope of them suffering horrible fates and having enough tools at my disposal to mete it out myself if personally attacked should their scheme succeed.
Depressing.
Who poses for his graduation picture making such an intimidating face?
“Who poses for his graduation picture making such an intimidating face?”
Someone who didn’t graduate because of his…um…academic rigor…?
PWS
Commonly athletes pose with an intimidating or intense facial expression.
But just for fun, let’s grab a bunch of highschool yearbooks and compare all the pictures to see if we can figure out an answer to your question.
I wasn’t sure exactly what happened until I read Darren Wilson’s testimony. Once I read what he said, I realized that he was probably telling the truth and everyone else, including the other police, were trying to throw him to the wolves.
What did he say? He said that in the struggle, he pulled the trigger didn’t work,it. He kept trying until it fired.
What he was describing was the out-of-battery safety. In a semi-auto, if you push the slide back, it will open the breech and start to extract the round (out-of-battery). The gun isn’t sealed. If the round goes off in this condition, the brass could rupture and the slide could move back so violently that it could come off the gun and hit the shooter. Pistols have safety mechanisms to make sure you can’t fire the gun in such a condition. Wilson’s testimony was that he was in a physical fight with Brown and Brown’s body was pushing on the end of the gun, putting it out-of-battery.
The problem was that the chief firearms instructor from St. Louis was brought in to testify as an expert witness and he said that Wilson’s testimony was false. The gun should have gone ‘click’ when out-of-battery, it doesn’t go into a ‘dead trigger’ state where the trigger just flops around. Wilson was lying because the gun should have gone ‘click’ when out-of-battery, not a dead trigger.
Wilson was then asked if he was mistaken. Wilson didn’t change his story. He insisted the gun didn’t click, it was dead trigger.
Why do I think Wilson was telling the truth? The St. Louis police firearms instructor is correct that Glock pistols go ‘click’ in that situation. However, different firearms manufacturers use different methods to prevent an out-of-battery detonation. Sig Sauer uses a different mechanism, so the trigger is dead when out-of-battery. Wilson had a Sig. The ‘expert’ was unfamiliar with any firearms but Glocks. They were trying to get Wilson to change his story and he didn’t even though they painted him as a liar. It is doubtful that Darren Wilson knew what the gun did out-of-battery until that instance, so his correct description lended some credibility to his account.
If you remember, the two competing stories were that Wilson shot Brown when Brown was standing in the street posing no threat and that Wilson shot Brown during a struggle inside Wilson’s police car. The out-of-battery observation wouldn’t have happened in the first scenario, but is likely in the second. Now there obviously was other evidence, but the out-of-battery testimony was what I saw in the media, as it tried to paint Wilson as a liar.
I’ve got two Glocks, one has a NY+ trigger installed as it is a retired police duty weapon. Both behave slightly differently depending on the slide’s position.
Both will release the striker (and fire if chambered, but I’m not going to test function in this state!) one to two millimeters displacement, but just prior to the point the Browning tilt-locking surfaces of the barrel and slide have fully disengaged, the triggers both pull and return without any “click” from the trigger bar leaving the striker’s sear surface (usually resulting in a “BANG” drowning out any other perceived sound).
The trigger’s return force is coming from the striker spring. This distance is also the furthest the slide will retract from only pressure on the barrel.
They’re different after this point–once the chamber begins to open, the civilian Glock indeed clicks–but this isn’t a striker disengage click, this is the trigger spring fully retracting the trigger with a slight force, because the trigger safety had been holding the trigger forward and was deactivated by the finger on the face of the trigger.
On the police NY+ Glock, instead of a retracting spring pulling the trigger bar up and rearward, it’s a compressed spring only pushing the trigger bar upward. This gives a friction trigger that moves rearward with slight pressure and no click.
Both trigger designs return to a fully operating state if the slide is allowed to return to battery, regardless of what was done to the trigger while out of battery.
“The problem was that the chief firearms instructor from St. Louis was brought in to testify as an expert witness and he said that Wilson’s testimony was false. The gun should have gone ‘click’ when out-of-battery, it doesn’t go into a ‘dead trigger’ state where the trigger just flops around.”
I’d walk up to that chief firearms instructor, look him straight in the eye, and tell him that I know, and he knows that he’s an INTENTIONAL liar! I have multiple Glocks and none of them go “click” when out of battery, NONE and neither do any of my other pistols. The only thing that person is “expert” in is lying!
I’ve been a firearm shooter, instructor, training NCO, range officer, both in the military and the civilian world for well over 40 years. This is always part of basic firearms function training for semi-auto pistols, always.
All pistols that have a reciprocating slide and locking barrel, regardless of whether it’s a 1911 styled pistol or a striker fired pistol, as the slide/barrel is pushed out of battery from the front (the barrel and the slide move rearward together) it causes the trigger to go dead, as in it can be pulled/squeezed (yes it moves) but it does nothing, that’s why it’s been called a dead trigger for over a hundred years, this isn’t something new that that “expert” hasn’t caught up on yet.
Depending on the firearm you might feel some of the internal parts rubbing against each other as you squeeze the trigger, Glock’s are like that, but there is definitely not anything that could be remotely considered a “click”, not in any way shape of form; I just verified this with mine. This dead trigger is intentionally built into the pistol design, it’s actually one of the safeties in a semi-auto pistol and it cannot be disabled. There are ways of counteracting this out of battery safety in emergency life threatening situations where someone is pushing their body against the front of the pistol, but it only works if the pistol has a manual safety that physically prevents the slide from moving, this counteraction can only be performed by operators that are full trained in the technique.
There are only a few pistols on the market that do not have this safety built into the design and that’s because they are typically not locking barrels, they are designed as blow back action for low powered cartridges. In these pistols the barrels are fixed in some way and do not allowed any movement rearward. Also, revolvers do not have this kind of safety, their barrel is fixed.
That chief firearms instructor intentionally lied in court in an obvious effort to try and make it look like the police officer lied. It’s not spin or a matter of personal opinion; that morally bankrupt “expert” openly lied in court, and he knew he was lying under oath.
There is also the fact that Michael Brown was shot in the hand, and that shot left residue in the officer’s car, confirming Wilson’s claim that there was a struggle in the car. That evidence is very different than “gunned down in the street.”
My reply to Rep. Rashida Tlaib’s post on X is as follows…
I’m sure that Rep. Tlaib has access to and knows absolutely all the facts in this case; therefore, I can only conclude that Rep. Tlaib is a morally bankrupt liar trying to gin up hate.
Why do people keep voting for morally bankrupt anti-American people like Rep. Tlaib?
Tlaib and her radical cohorts don’t give a flying fig about Michael Brown. This is just another campaign ploy to gin up passion for the upcoming elections. So many people don’t remember the facts but do remember ‘hands up.’ They are lying sacks of dung, but it’s an effective strategy.