Replies

AL SHARPTON: "My clients innocent? Ya gotta be kidding me. Sure they had guns, look at the neighborhood they were in. And they was drunk. And they tried to run over the po-leece after being told to put their hands up. It's just like that thing with the Black Panthers you did, Hillary."

"I can see the $50,000,000 coming, I can see the $50,000,000 coming. Praise the Lord!"

HILLARY: " So when do I get my cut?"

Which case are you talking about? This is the "bridgroom" thing. None of the targets were armed. Most of the shooting was done by one officer, but the Undercover guy got in 11 rounds, all on target. Guess that happens when you stand on the hood and shoot down through the window into the target.

Run over? On top the hood? Irreconcilable issues ~

There's even some confusion regarding who the cops were shooting at ~ some of them seemed to be of the impression the guy who was the undercover cop was one of the bad guys. His own testimony about where he was at what time tends to dovetail with the supposed sighting of a "fourth person". He's lucky he didn't get hit.

Regarding the "whiteness" of a person of Lebanese ancestry, some are certainly considered "white" and some are certainly considered "non-white" ~ depends on the time of day, social circumstances, etc. Folks in that part of the world have been bringing in African slaves for thousands and thousands of years.

Oh, yeah, and the SUV part of the story. In the "bridegroom case" the COPS own the SUV, their targets are in a sedan. The story you are trying to insert has the targets with the SUV, and the cops in a sedan or on foot.

That's enough difference anyone could easily differentiate between the two stories. The "Arabs with machinegun case" has nothing to do with this one.