#FAIL: Democrat/MSM narratives fall apart in tragic #TrayvonMartin case

Another day, another Democrat/MSM myth / narrative busted (via Memeorandum):

The individual at the center of the controversial Trayvon Martin shooting is a registered Democrat.

George Michael Zimmerman, born Oct. 5, 1983, registered as a Democrat in Seminole County, Fla., in August 2002, according to state voter registration documents.

It is unclear whether he voted for President Barack Obama in 2008.

Some in the media have sought to blame Republican politicians and conservative activists for Martin’s death.

“[Republican politicians] reinforce and validate old stereotypes that associate the poor and welfare as criminal behavior with African-Americans and people of color, calling us lazy, undeserving recipients of public assistance. In the case of Trayvon, those festering stereotypes had lethal consequences,” said MSNBC political analyst and Democratic fundraiser Karen Finney.

According to the document, Zimmerman’s race is officially listed as Hispanic. The son of a white father and Peruvian mother, he has been described as a “white Hispanic” in most media reports.

In the scheme of things NONE of this should really matter but to race/party-obsessed Democrats desperate to gain traction in yet another tough election year, in the fighting spirit of Rahmbo they’re not letting the “opportunity” go to waste to once again attempt use a tragedy to paint their political opposition as “violent racists” — even though there was ZERO, ZILCH, NADA political motive for what happened between George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin on the night of February 26, 2012.   Once you read the police reports, listen to the audio recordings, etc, you see that the race of the alleged victim and the alleged perp in this case aren’t relevant whatsoever except to a political  party that treats perpetual victimhood as a family value.  And, of course, the national main stream media has gone right along with it by jumping into a local story and selectively reporting information that “helps” create the (false) narrative that George Zimmerman was a meddling racist white man, influenced by conservatives, who SET OUT to murder a black teen because he was wearing a hoodie.

MediaI’ve written about this a lot on Twitter the last few days as I’ve attempted to gather my thoughts and actually READ and flesh out the information available out there to draw my own conclusions, unlike most left wingers, politicos, agenda-driven journalists, race hustlers, and the left’s key voting bloc:  uninformed, easily manipulated American citizens. I’m not hyperventilating about raaaaacism in America, nor am I deliberately glossing over key information, and I’m not speaking before I’ve spent a reasonable amount of time researching case specifics – much of which has been available since the week of the shooting, contra to sensationalistic “news” outlets like CBS News who try to paint old information as “new details.”

Let me give you an important link in all this that will help you draw your own conclusions as well.  The City of Sanford released, among other things, audio of the 911 calls from the night of the shooting, including the call from George Zimmerman (labeled “call 1″), which was made before he got out on foot to track Trayvon Martin’s whereabouts.  In another call, you can hear part of the struggle taking place – where someone is yelling for help.  Then you hear a shot and nothing after that.

Here are some things you also need to know:

— It has been confirmed (on the night of the shooting, not “recently”) by two EYEwitnesses, one a teenage boy out walking his dog that night and a resident of the townhome development, that George Zimmerman was the person screaming for help, on his back, getting beat up by Trayvon Martin. Martin’s father initially told the Sanford police that the voice he heard crying for help was NOT Trayvon Martin but  he has since changed his story.  So if you were thinking that George Zimmerman ambushed Trayvon Martin and killed him in cold blood, you’re wrong.

— It is confirmed as per the 911 call Zimmerman made that night that once he was on foot looking for Trayvon Martin that he had LOST sight of Martin.  Police say there is about a one minute gap in between the time of end of Zimmerman’s phone call to them where they don’t know what happened and after that one minute is what they hear on the 911 call made by the resident as the struggle is in progress.  Zimmerman told police that he’d lost sight of Martin and was headed back to his SUV when Martin confronted him and that’s when the altercation allegedly started.  Zimmerman’s claims are that Martin asked him what his problem was and said that he had a problem now, and punched him in the nose and slammed his head against the sidewalk and was on top of him, beating him up, and that he (Martin) was reaching for his (Zimmerman’s) gun, and that he (Zimmerman) had no choice but to shoot to save his life.

— Per the Sanford PD, Zimmerman’s physical appearance that night was consistent with someone who had been on the grass and hit in the back of the head and punched in the nose.

— Contra to the claims made by various mainstream media outlets, George Zimmerman did not make 46 calls to 911 in a year and a half’s time. He made that many calls since  2004.  Hardly the actions of a “meddling, busy body neighborhood watchman.”

— One of the 911 calls Zimmerman made was about a 7-9 year old black boy.  Daily Beast noted this in their reporting about his 911 call history but falsely claimed that no reason was given for why he called 911 on a 7-9 year old black boy. The left, of course, assumes he did it because he is so suspicious of black people that he’ll report an innocent child.  In fact, the very same police report indicated that the caller (George Zimmerman) had called 911 because the boy was wandering around alone near a busy street and he was concerned about his welfare.  Sure sounds like a racist to me. Not.

— FACT: The neighborhood in question has seen a rise in crime over the last year, and neighbors describe black youths as the primary culprits.  Naturally, if you’re paying attention to what’s going on in your neighborhood, you’re going to look for anyone who might be suspicious, including people who fit the description of the people who have been burglarizing homes in the area.

Spin Blvd Truth Ave– Contra to the MSM’s continual posting of an older picture of a baby-faced small Trayvon Martin, he was a 17 year old, 6’2″ 150-160 lb  teenager (not a “child” as so many left wingers are screaming out) who was in good enough shape to play high school football, in contrast to George Zimmerman – who is approximately 5’9″, over 200 lbs and out of shape.  Also, a profile picture on both Martin’s Facebook and Twitter pages shows him with gold grills for teeth, the kind you typically see on rappers and “gangstas.” The language and slang used on his Twitter account was gangsta slang (example: “Niggaz” was part of his Twitter name).   Yes, he had trouble in school with being suspended for, among other things,  having a baggie with trace elements of marijuana.  His Twitter feed indicated that he smoked it regularly.  And just like in most rap songs, he had an unhealthy disrespect for black women and violently fantasized about “Glock use.”

These are all FACTS, not “racism.”

— Some have argued as to the relevance of this information, claiming people noting this are “blaming the victim.” Not really.  What all of that tells us is that Trayvon Martin is exactly the kind of person you would think would angrily and aggressively confront someone he felt was following him, rather than maintaining a safe distance.

Here are some questions to ask yourself if you think George Zimmerman deliberately set out to kill a black teenager that night:

-Do those who plan on murdering someone typically call the police and give them their whereabouts before they commit the act? George Zimmerman did.

– Do those who plan on targeting someone for murder typically give the police all their personal information (name, address, telephone number) prior to commencing with their sinister plot? George Zimmerman did.

– Do those whose intent it was to kill someone tell the police to call them back so they can tell them where they are while they are tracking someone they view as suspicious in their neighborhood? George Zimmerman did.

– Do those who have a bloodlust for gunning down anyone who looks suspicious – black or otherwise – call 911 at all to report the activity rather than take the law into their own hands? George Zimmerman did.   In fact, on the phone call he made to 911, he first describes Trayvon was walking towards his SUV like Trayvon was going to confront him then.  If his intent was to kill, don’t you think he’d have pulled his gun at that time and fired?

– Do people who are on top of someone else beating them up usually call for help multiple times?

– Is it possible that George Zimmerman’s intent was to merely “keep a track” of Trayvon’s whereabouts until police got there rather than to have an altercation/confrontation? Remember, he told the 911 operator to have the police call him so he could tell them where he (GZ) was when they got there.

– Should George Zimmerman have stayed in his SUV and let the police handle this situation, as was urged by the 911 dispatcher? My answer is yes, especially hindsight being what it is.

– Did you know that George Zimmerman has also reported “suspicious-looking” Hispanic males to 911?

Keystone CopsThere have been suggestions by some that the Sanford PD royally screwed up the handling of the case. I see some things they probably should have done, but as far as colossal errors that would compromise the case to any significant degree, I’m just not seeing it.    One issue brought up by Trayvon Martin’s family was that George Zimmerman was not tested for drugs or alcohol, which I guess is a standard procedure after a violent gun crime.  Yes, the police should have done that – but they didn’t, and I’m not sure what it would have proved, anyway.  A narcotics detective rather than a homicide detective interviewed Zimmerman first than night. I’m not sure if he was interviewed by a homicide detective if it would have made a difference, but people with much more legal insight will hopefully weigh in with their thoughts on it so I/you can make your judgment call about that.

Much hay has been made by some conservatives about the fact that Martin’s mother Sybrina is trying to trademark her son’s name. I have zero issue with this and completely believe the family’s explanation that they don’t want anyone exploiting Trayvon Martin’s name for financial gain outside of them, and that any money they make would go to programs that they hope would ensure this type of situation doesn’t happen to another family.

My heart aches for Trayvon’s parents.  They’ve lost their son.  God bless them and comfort them. I will not disparage them, even though I despise the race pimps like Sharpton and  Jackson who are using them and their son to advance their own pathetic agendas.  Talk about dancing on graves. The Jacksons and Sharptons of this world, and the national MSM, is where most of my ire will be directed.

I hope Trayvon’s mom and dad get the answers they seek, whether it be through a trial where ALL evidence is laid out on the table, or over the long term as investigators at the local, state, and national level dig into the case.  Sadly, I doubt they ever will now that the combined circus of both the national MSM and Race Hustlers of America have come to town.  Once they show up, the desire for facts and truth are abandoned in favor of sensationalism, ratings, and personal/professional/political motives that have nothing to do with giving a grieving family any degree of peace of mind.

And don’t even get me started on our celebrity President’s insertion of himself into this case by saying if he had a son, he would look like Trayvon.  Way to show the “fairness” of the US Justice system, Mr. President.

Lastly, I don’t know everything about this case and don’t want to come off as acting like I do.  I don’t know everything that HAPPENED that night.  No one does, except George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin, who unfortunately is no longer around to ask.  Was this preventable? Yes, if Zimmerman had stayed in his vehicle.  But he didn’t – I suspect more out of a misguided motivation to be a helpful hero to the police than anything else.  And because he didn’t, a young (troubled-sounding) teenager is dead, and we’re all left wondering how it got to that point.

Nothing in this post should be construed as me being on one side or the other. I am on the side of being as informed as I can be and finding out all the facts, and helping others in guiding them to information that will help them draw their own conclusions.  All I am saying with this is to keep an open mind.  My personal view is that the media/Dem narratives about this case are falling apart and that Zimmerman at best would face an involuntary manslaughter charge.  It’s clear he didn’t set out to kill anyone that night based on his 911 call. He had opportunities before the deadly confrtontation and he didn’t take them. He had opportunities on other occasions, too, with other “suspicious people” he reported but didn’t take them.

It is in fact possible to want justice for both Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman.  That is where I stand.

And now, the floor is yours.

More about the Obama-Medvedev open-mic moment

**Posted by Phineas

Yesterday, while writing about the president’s inadvertent moment of transparency during his talks with Russian President Medvedev, in which Obama offered that he could be more flexible regarding missile defense after his reelection, I wondered the following:

Or maybe it’s the interests of others? This should make all those former possessions of the Soviet empire feel real secure.

Turns out we didn’t have to wait long to find out the truth in that. A headline in a major Polish tabloid read (translated)

“Were they trading Poland? Puzzling Obama talk with Medvedev about the missile shield.”

You can see the original at Buzzfeed, via Hot Air.

Poland has an unfortunate history of being the meat on the carving board whenever other great powers deal with Russia; Obama’s 2009 sellout over missile defense was only the most recent example. Now with Obama asking for “space” so he can be more flexible later, I don’t blame the Poles nor anyone else in Russia’s “near abroad” for being nervous. I’d be looking for a target on my back, too.

Meanwhile, with yesterday’s “nothing to see here, move along” statements apparently not convincing many people, Obama himself stepped before the cameras (this time knowing the mic was on) to insist he wasn’t hiding anything:

A defensive President Obama said Tuesday he wasn’t guilty of “hiding the ball” when an open microphone caught him pleading with the president of Russia to delay missile shield talks until after this year’s elections.

“The only way I get this stuff done is If I’m consulting with the Pentagon, with Congress, if I’ve got bipartisan support and frankly, the current environment is not conducive to those kinds of thoughtful consultations,” Mr. Obama told reporters at a nuclear security summit here. “This is not a matter of hiding the ball.”

(…)

“What I said yesterday … is something that I think everyone in this room understands,” the president said. “Arms control is extraordinarily complex, very technical, and the only way it gets done is if you can consult and build a strong understanding, both between countries and within countries.”

Shorter Obama: “Who are you going to believe? Me or your lying ears?”

Like I wrote yesterday, I understand political difficulties in an election year. But consulting Congress and the Pentagon isn’t what Obama was talking about in his tete-a-tete with Medvedev. He was specifically asking for “space” with the promise that he himself could be more flexible next year regarding Kremlin demands, when he would no longer be accountable to the voters. It wasn’t a simple “let’s wait until next year when US politics are calmer to talk about these things,” it was a plea for Russian help for Obama’s reelection effort. As Andrew Malcom of IBD put it, it was “backstage conniving.”

And lest anyone say this is just Right-wing panic over nothing, consider the president’s record with Russia: the embarrassing reset moment; the horrible deal in 2010 in the latest START treaty; the appeasement over missile defense in 2009 at the cost of betraying allies; and the flaccid reaction to Russian arms sales to Hugo Chavez, an avowed American enemy; the willingness to give up British nuclear secrets. I’m sure there are other moments of Smart Power that illustrate the same point: far from having a clear vision of America’s national interests, Obama is intellectually trapped in an outdated worldview that sees a dominant United States as part of the problem, not the best hope for a peaceful, prosperous world. His foreign policy is dangerous because it is dangerously naive.

That’s why critics don’t trust his whispered sidebar conversations with our traditional enemies: a leftist ideology married to alarming naivete is a recipe for disaster.

And that’s one big reason he has to go in November.

UPDATE: It figures. Democrats are just fine with Obama’s whispered words and approvingly cite President Medvedev (!) to bash Mitt Romney.  But they’ll scream bloody murder when we question their patriotism because of it.

(Crossposted at Public Secrets)