The Anti-Amiercan, Despicable Associated Press (complete, official name) had this headline on THE featured picture story on my Yahoo "News"/AT&T "welcome" page this morning:
"George Zimmerman complained abut Samford police in 2011"
I am not making this up This what the EVIL (i mean this word literally RACISTS ) of the despicable AP, and Yahoo"Nes"/AT&T (name right there on top with Yaho "Nes", as I go on the internet every day knowing that these evil people are trying to HEP me by getting my adrenalin going--knowing I am getting old) regard as "news". It is not "news", of course. Only pepple like th eEVIL RACISTS of AP/Yahoo "News"/AT&T could regard this as "news". It does not even rise to the level of EVIIL back fence gossip, which is what it is inteneded to be. "SO WHAT" is the only appropriate reaction to this piece of crap masquerading as "journalism" . This is meant to be a continuation of the LYNCHING of Geroge Zimmerman, HISPANIC, as the media continues to play RACIAL POLITICS (this time choosing to LYNCH an Hispanic, to support African-American racial politics).
The Yahoo (I beg yu: BOYCOTT YAHOO AND AT&T: it is workng with Yahoo, as the despicable company can't even keep a CEO, and hires new CEOs who LIE about their college education) headline, on its featured picture story, was WORSE:
"George Ziimmerman calls police 'disgusting' "
Say what? Would you not take that to mean that George Zimmerman called police "disgusting" AFTER HIS ARRESTT? Read that AP headline again. This particllar item of allegd back fence gossip occurred in 20111. So help me, this may be a new LOW for the AP, and for Yaho "News". And that means this may be the WORST single "news" story in the history of the universe. That is how low they sink EVERY DAY. For them to set a "new low" means that they have reached a new low for the history of 'journalism". What possible difference couuld it make if George Zimmerman had called the Samford police "m.... f------ in 2011. What does it tell yu about whether George Zimmerman acted in self-defense, or not, when he shot Trayvon Martin while LOSING that fight? It tells you NOTHING, except that the people of the AP/Yahoo?AT&T are EVIL RACISTS trying to conduct a LYNCHING. Again, llthnese (AP/Yahoo/AT&T) are some of the most evil peeople who have ever lived. God help George Zimmerman if he had used the phrase I reference above. THAT would be a story lasting at least a WEEK, and regurgitated about weeky thereafter. Look how long the eVIL media remained fixated on "f------ coons", and still try to make a lot out of Zimmerman saying "f------ asshole".
Then there is the way the Yahoo descriptoin of this story appears under the picture (a picture NOT of George Zimmerman, but of a black man): "Alleged murderer George Zimmerman.......'
Message to the peole of Yahoo: You really are some of the most EVIL RACISTS who have ever lived. Again, I worry that I am REPRESSING my reeal feelings here: hlding them in so mcyh that it may make me sick I can't even express my CONTEMPT of you people at Yahoo. I hpe I meet one of yoiu some day, so I can tell you to your face (which I wil do, evven if it is in church, or some similar inappropriate place).
"George Zimmerman complained abut the AP, Yahoo and AT&T in 2011"., "translated" on Yahoo (whose lpeople probably don't speak Spanish) as follows: "George Zimmerman calls 'journalists' 'disgusting' "
Wait. Those headlines immediately above refer to ME. However, the headlines would be just as "relevant" to ANY "issue" in the Zimmerman case as the actual headline. I want ANY of you pepople from the AP, or Yahoo, or AT&T to tell me why it is 'news" that George Zimmerman said an uncomplimentary thing about the Sam ford police a YER BEFORE the shooting. It would not even likely be relevant if Ximmerman had been accused of murdering a police officer. What does George Zimmerman's alleged, one-time comment on the Samford police have to do with ANYTHHING. Nope. This is NOT NEWS. It is not even BACK FFENCE GOSSIP. It is the eVIL propaganda of EVIL RACISTS with an agenda (desperate to deflect the news from the FACTS that have come out SUPPORTING George Zimmerman's version of events).
For the "disgusting' people of the AP/Yahoo/AT&T, this is a "win-win" thing. WHO is it who has said REALLY BAD THINGS abut the Samford pollice? Hint: it is NOT George Zimmerman. Ruight. It is the EVIL people of the MEDIA. This headline has a "double' benefit for these EVIL peopple. It vaguely attacks George Zimmerman as a "wild man" (loll--a person who calls the police "disgusting"--how terrible), and it also is a way for the MEDIA to put out its PROPAGANDA against the Samford police (who may desserve it, but the media do not CARE whether they do or they don't). This is not even 'new" stuff. I heard a BLACK friend oof Zimmerman say that he understood why peole might think the Samford police "blew it", since the Samford police have been so bad that he wouild have thought the same thing himself if he did not know George Zimmerman.
"Martin family despises Samford police: calls thiiem 'disgusting' "
Now this POSSIBLE AP/Yahoo/AT&T headline is almost certainly TRUE (at least in substance as to the attitude of the Martin family toward the Samford police). But you will NEVER see this headline from the EVIL RACISTS of the media--except phrased much more favorably toward the Marint family..
How can it possibly be RELEVANT that George Zimmerman might have ONCE held a low opinino of the Samfor d police, when that is apparenty true of more than half of the people of the town. In fat, Zimmerman's commment might only indicate that he picked this up from his BLACK friends: showing that ZIMMERMAN is ot racist. However, the AP/Yahoo/AT&T ARE RACIST. George Zimmerman could teach them a thing or two. In fact, he could teach them a thing or gwo about "journalism", but the same could be said of your average psychpathic inmate of a criminal insane asylum.
You may remember that I was a TEXAS LAWYER for some 35 years. I only handled a few criminal cases, but this is elemnetary stuff. Is it ADMISSIBLE "evidence" that George Zimmerman MAY have called Samford police "disgusting" in 2011? Not a chance. Why is it not admissible? It is because it is IRRELEVANT. Even if it were remotely relevant on the issue of whether George Zimmerman acted in self-defense (it is not), or on any other 'issue' i the case, George Zimmerman's "opinion" of the Samford police is a COLLATERAL ISSUE, which cuould only deflect the jry from the real issues in the case, and maybe haing a prejudicial effect on some jurors way beyond whatever remotely "relveant' probative effet there might be. In this case, there is NO possible probative effect: whether George Zimmerman said that the Samford police were "disgusting" does not have ANY probative effect as to whether George Zimmerman "murdedered" Trayvon martin. It does not make that either more or less likely to be true.
Read the above paragraph carefully I say that not because it is a useful, brief lecture on "relevance", and collateral issues", in the admission of evidence. No. I told you, in the abovve paragraph, exactly WHY the EVIL RACISTS of the AP/Yahoo/AT&T "featured" this "sotry". It is MEANT as a "distraction". It is MEANT to deflet people away from the REAL ISSUES in the Zimmerman case, and from the truly despicable previous performance off the evil peope of the "news" media. It is MEANT to DEFLECT yur attentin toward a totally irrelevant "collateral issue" that has nothing to do with any 'issue' ih this case. The media is dong EXACTLY what a lawyer mmight do trying to DEFECT the jury onto a collaterl issue, when the lawyer KNOWS that he is LOSING on the real issues.
You can actrually look at me as an expert on this. First, I am a lawyer who finished 3rd in my law school class at the University of Texas School of Law (albeint almost 40 years ago). Further, I have been a "critic" of the "news" media for at least a DECADE, and that means almost daily DOCUMENTING the multiple failures of the modern 'journalist". These people (oru media) are getting WORSE, and no one has cocumented it more than this blog This particular story hit me immediately as one of the WORST I hav evern seen. This is terrible stuff, and there is NO defense to it. As usual, I welcome any comment (which will NOT be edited or deleted) trying to "defend" the indefensible. The only caution I would gi ve you as to this mainstream medai ploy (inviting a response) on my part, is that I fully intend to comment on any comment. And I don't think I will be kind (if it is a comment defending this despicable media conduct).
P.S. No proofreading or spell checknig (bad eyesight).