Help me understand this better — had the cop’s eye socket been fractured, THEN it would’ve been okay to execute Brown?
—
Markos Moulitsas (@markos) August 21, 2014The anti-cop narrative surrounding the fatal shooting of Michael Brown by officer Darren Wilson is falling apart. The latest shoe to drop: The disclosure that Brown may have struck Wilson in the face just prior to the shooting. (Wilson’s eye socket may or may not have been fractured, but as Hot Air’s Allahpundit notes, “what’s apparently not in dispute is that Wilson somehow emerged from the incident with part of his face swollen.”)
Liberal blogger Markos Moulitsas appear to believe that none of it matters: Brown was shot by a cop; therefore, the cop is at fault.
Like we said the other day, when you’re a liberal, it’s always the cops’ fault.
His readers tried to help him understand:
@markos well if that actually were the case, it would probably support self-defense.—
Aaron North (@Northjayhawk) August 21, 2014
@markos I'd say it just lends some more info. Like there was a protracted struggle.—
Steve (@Steven_Patz) August 21, 2014
@markos assumes, of course, an 'execution'. When did liberals stop believing in "innocent until PROVEN guilty"?—
Ezra Cole (@DesertedOdds) August 21, 2014
@markos that'd be evidence the officer was in mortal danger, and was probably justified in defending himself—
Jeff Chermely (@ChermesePython) August 21, 2014
@magicclams @markos pretty sure it applies to the "accused". Of course *if* you bum rush police after assaulting them, you'll get shot. #law—
Ezra Cole (@DesertedOdds) August 21, 2014
It really isn’t all that complicated.
Related:
Howard Kurtz: ‘Shoplifting’ video sheds no light on what happened in Michael Brown shooting