Michael Savage condemns no Garner indictment

[video=youtube;Fv5b9H2ati4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fv5b9H2ati4[/video]

Wow, even Michael Savage, the right-wing extremist who thinks Liberalism is a "mental disorder", is shocked that there was no indictment against the cop who killed Eric Garner, and thinks the cop should have been indicted for murder.

I hate Savage and his views, but I applaud him for putting politics aside, and standing up for what's right.

 

On no planet should he have been indicted for murder. It was clearly an accident. Criminal negligence at worst. Reckless endangerment was possible as well. However, I'm surprised he was cleared of all charges.

 

that's the problem. there were no charges, even though some form of a crime was clearly committed.

 

The crime was resisting arrest. If Garner hadn't resisted arrest, then he would be alive today. While this is a tragedy, it doesn't have to be in vain, we can learn from it, and that lesson is to stop resisting arrest. I have recently watched a number videos on the topic of police killings, and the one common theme to all of them was that the person who was killed was resisting arrest. So, let's get the word out … don't try to fight the law by resisting arrest, get face down on the ground with your hands behind your back, and live to see another day.

As to the “choke hold”, we know that Garner was able to breath because he was able to speak. If the cop had a "killer hold" then speech would have been impossible, because speech requires air flow.

Finally, if selling untaxed cigarettes is not something worth arresting people over, then lets remove that law from the books … I don't have a problem with that. If you support that law, then you can only accept that the cops were only trying to do their job.

 

But wait! We're supposed to fall in line according to political affiliation! What happened here?

 

It should be a citation like speeding, not an arrest.

 

Why are you so surprised? Most rational people decide on their stance case by case. They look at what happened and decide which is right in their opinion. But Liberals NEVER do that. They strictly adhere to their ideology even when it's wrong. For instance, no matter what the circumstances, the cop will ALWAYS be guilty and the bad guy because that what their ideology says. For rational people, they realize that cops are there for the good of society, but sometimes they make mistakes or may even be bad. But that is case-by-case. You can't paint all cops as evil because one day you just may need one. I believe that the Grand Jury was correct in the Ferguson case, but wrong in the New York case. In neither case do I believe what happened was intentional or race based. My beef with the New York cop was that the man said he couldn't breathe and they didn't release their grip on him. He was already down. There were plenty of cops there. I think there was at the very least excessive force used. He was selling cigarettes illegally for which you can be arrested in New York. Go figure...

 

What one must keep in mind is how Michael Savage is first and foremost Jewish.
And that Michael Savage biggest fan is Michael Savage himself.
Jews are traditionally and sociologically nearly joined at the hip in the
form of voting patterns and thoughts about oppression.Both the jews and
the black were Oppressed peoples.
The Jewish community { not the Hasidic } is very supportive of Blacks
and black agendas.The ACLU is chock full of Jewish lawyers who do pro bono
work for the black community.
I think the reason that Michael Savage was near hysterical in his denounciation
of the Garner decision { NOT to Indict } is simple.Savage,after bloviating 5 ways to
Sunday and back about Obama this and Obama that and the other " gentle giant "
Michael Brown made him appear very anti-black.Savage is very uneasy talking
and after all he's a Talker,about blacks and black issues.It's a Jewish thing.
Blacks have relied for decades on the good graces and help from the Jewish
community.Because they both suffered Oppression.
I think Savage is covering his bases.He has to make it appear he's totally on the
side of blacks.Because he is teetering on the edge of being labeled a Racist.
That is a Jews worst fear.To be considered a Racist.
Which is Ironic because Savage is also a Huge Pro Cop guy.
Seldom will one hear Savage bad mouth a cop or the Police.In fact,he's very
fond of praising the Police and honoring their work.
And Savage is also quick to point out the reality of what his father insisted as a kid.
That one Never argue with the Police.Never.
Which is exactly what Eric Garner did.He stood and brazenly balled the cops out.
Breaking a near sacred right of Savage tradition.To never argue with the Cops.Ever.
Which means ... Savage has a real uphill battle.
Which Savage is the one heard on that video.
The Savage of yesterday or from a week agr over the summer when he got
a private police escort to a Police funeral.Getting stuck in traffic and eventually
having a cop on horseback personally transport him to the front of the Funeral
motorcade and to Funeral.

 

just shows that even idiot Savage can have some moments of rationality

 

No crime was committed.........

unless you count resisting arrest...........

You realize you have to be able to prove intent............

His intent was to arrest....

 

the penalty for resisting arrest, is death?

wow. talk about Fascism.

 

IT is when you are fat and cant handle being arrested apparently........

The cops did NOT kill him.

PRO TIP:

If you are in poor health..............do not fight the police...........

fight in court........

 

You need to google the definition of murder. This was a choke-hold designed to subdue someone, sometimes people pass out because they struggle too much during these moves.

Prove to us he MEANT to kill him.

You cannot.

That said, I still think he showed negligence and should have been charged with something of the sort.

 

the licensed medical professional hired to do the autospy, disagrees with you.

- - - Updated - - -

i never said the cop should have been charged with Murder.

I think he should have been charged with some form of Manslaughter.

 

Which form?

List it and I will tell you why it does not apply.

The fact you just want something to pin on him is telling...............

 

what you think matters not

Can you prove he was negligent?

 

Charles Krauthammer and Andrew Napolitano have also questioned that grand jury's decision.

It is interesting in contrast to the reaction to the decision of the grand jury in the Michael Brown case. However, I'm sure that these RWers are united in opposing the antics of Bill de Blasio, Al Sharpton, Louis Farrakhan, et al.

 

i feel a lot stronger about the Garner lack of indictment than the Brown one.

why? the video.

plus this is NYC, and we are more educated than the hicks in the sticks of St. Louis.

 

I think there appears to be more grounds for an indictment, but I wasn't sitting on that grand jury, either.

Please don't confuse education with conceit.

 

If you were more educated, you would know what crime you wanted him charged with.

 

negligent Manslaughter

 

Not too many "right wing extremists" would go skinny dipping with homosexual pedophiles as Mr. Weiner has. There's a reason he is considered by some to be a fake conservative... just someone who wanted to find a niche for himself, regardless of his true politics.

 

There is no crime on the books in New York of Negligent Manslaughter......

 

prove it

 

Neither should the NE morons confuse education with smart. They do that a lot, which merely proves how dumb they really are.