If this isn't the most contorted apologia for the thuggery that led Michael Brown to his death, it's pretty damn close.
You just knew that MSNBC action hero and lefty podcaster Ed Schultz would serve up singularly delusional opinions on the grand jury's decision against charging Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson for Brown's death back in August. It was just a question of how delusional.
Here's Schultz on his podcast Wednesday, living up to expectations while talking with Democrat congressman Gregory Meeks of New York and dissecting Wilson's testimony before the grand jury (audio) --
SCHULTZ: I want to focus on you as a (former) prosecutor and draw on your experience to what we know the testimony is in this case. Darren Wilson says that, you know, clearly he was scared, he feared for his life, described the demeanor of the deceased as a demon, demon-like, and he talked about, and this is what has been reported, that the grand jury focused in on the altercation that took place at the car. And if my facts are correct, Michael Brown left the car after that confrontation and created some distance between himself and the police vehicle with the officer still in the car. The officer made the conscious decision to get out of the car after that altercation, Michael Brown turned around and came back to him, and that's when the shots were fired, which seems to me that the altercation at the car becomes immaterial. It's like, that was one event. When Michael Brown left, now we another event that's going to take place, and the officer pursued a man that he knew to be unarmed.
And some of the questions from the jury, the grand jury before they went to deliberation, could Michael Brown's hands be considered as a weapon? Well, Michael Brown's hands were not a threat to the officer's body once he left the car and created a distance. It was the engagement of the police officer after that and not waiting for backup as I see as a crucial bit here of information that was discarded or not considered properly by the grand jury. Your thoughts on all of that.
MEEKS: Number one, Ed, you're right in that what the DA generally does when you're before the grand jury, this is not a petit jury that's to decide all of those details. This is only to decide probable cause and generally it's one-sided and the prosecutor would come in and make those arguments of which you made, to show that there is probable cause that there was a crime committed and the prosecutor would then ask the jury to bring back a true bill, or bring back an indictment.
In agreeing with Schultz, Meeks gets it right but not as he intends. True, "there was a crime committed" that day in Ferguson -- more accurately, several by my count, and none involving Wilson. The criminal was Brown, whose illegal actions began when he shoplifted from a convenience store and assaulted its owner (a man of color airbrushed from the dominant media narrative). Next comes Brown punching a police officer, a more serious offense, after Wilson told him to get off the road. Far more serious still, Brown tried to grab Wilson's gun. In only a matter of minutes, Brown ran the gamut from petty thief to potentially deadly assailant.
Schultz would have us believe that Brown punching Wilson and trying to steal his gun is "immaterial" (defined by Black's Law Dictionary as "not important or pertinent; not decisive; of no substantial consequence"), this being "one event" separate from Wilson's shooting of Brown that followed within the next minute, "another event." Which is like saying that if you ignore what Lee Harvey Oswald did at 12:30 p.m. in Dealey Plaza on Nov. 22, 1963, and consider only his actions after that, he was merely guilty of leaving work early.
After the altercation at the cruiser, Wilson pursued a man "he knew to be unarmed," Schultz complains. Wilson was also chasing a man who just attempted to become armed while assaulting a police officer. Even though Brown has shown he was violent and unpredictable, Schultz would prefer Wilson stay in his vehicle and wait for other police to arrive -- despite the fact that Wilson, still armed, retained the upper hand.
In his remarks just after the grand jury's decision, President Obama said the rage in Ferguson was an "understandable reaction" -- as opposed to the reaction of those who agreed with the grand jury. "The situation in Ferguson speaks to broader challenges that we face as a nation," Obama also said. "The fact is, in too many parts of this country, a deep distrust exists between law enforcement and communities of color. Some of this is the result of the legacy of racial discrimination in this country and this is tragic because nobody needs good policing more than poor communities with higher crime rates."
Providing that police limit their encounters with suspected criminals who are also men of color. And when this inevitably occurs, officers should remain in their cruisers awaiting help from other police. Following by liberals complaining about police overreaction.
