Showing posts with label lies. Show all posts
Showing posts with label lies. Show all posts

Saturday, August 29, 2020

Fusion GPS ;its have created so much chaos all based on lies.

Fusion GPS Leader Bragged in 2019 Book About Planting False Attacks Against Devin Nunes in Local Newspaper


Nunes Walking With Coffee
AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite
11:02

House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) ranking member Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) was the target of opposition research hits that a local newspaper, owned by a broader national chain, dutifully reprinted on behalf of Fusion GPS without disclosing to its readers the questionable source of the information.

The Fresno Bee published a story in the leadup to the 2018 midterm elections, in late May 2018, that claimed in its salacious headline that Nunes was associated with cocaine and prostitutes at a yacht party. “A yacht, cocaine, prostitutes: Winery partly owned by Nunes sued after fundraiser event,” read the headline from Fresno Bee reporter MacKenzie Mays on the May 23, 2018, article.

The article itself, however, does not back up the headline. What happened was that a winery that Nunes has a minority ownership stake in—meaning he has no management decision-making authority, just a minority stake in the firm—held a charity auction for a yacht ride. On the yacht ride, the winners allegedly, per a lawsuit from a winery staffer at the event, had been doing lots of cocaine and had prostitutes on board who engaged in nefarious acts. While that sounds like an awful experience for the staffer who endured it—the lawsuit was settled out of court—the idea this had anything at all to do with Nunes is simply untrue.

Kelly Carter, the spokesperson for the winery named Alpha Omega, made that clear in a statement to the newspaper. Rep. Devin Nunes is one of a few friends [Alpha Omega owner Robin Baggett] invited to invest in the winery in 2005. None of the investors has ever been involved with the management of the company. Robin is the sole managing partner and ultimate decision maker at Alpha Omega,” Carter said.

While Nunes did not comment for the original story, he did later run a series of advertisements against the newspaper over the salacious article for conduct to which he had no connection—pretty aggressive for a sitting member of Congress to challenge his local newspaper in broadcast advertisements.

Nunes says in one of the 2018 ads:

Like you, I live in the San Joaquin Valley. My family lives here, my daughters go to public schools here, and I spend most of my time here when I’m not in Washington or visiting United States military and intelligence personnel abroad. Sadly, since the last election, the Fresno Bee has worked closely with radical left wing groups to promote fake news stories about me. Now, I signed up for this job and I find the attacks amusing. I haven’t said much about the Bee’s strange crusade against me even when reporters went creeping around my neighbors’ and relatives’ homes. But the Bee has run multiple articles slandering a California Agri-Business simply because I’m one of its investors. It’s time to set the record straight. For many years, the owner of Alpha Omega, a small, family-owned winery and vineyard, has donated the use of its boat to charities for underprivileged kids. In 2015, one of the purchasers of this auction item abused the use of the boat. The Bee has run numerous false stories about this incident.

Nunes then says in the 2018 ad that listeners can “hear the real story” in a statement provided by the winery for broadcast. In that statement, a spokesperson for Alpha Omega says that the Fresno Bee “cited false information stating the people aboard the boat were Alpha Omega investors.”

The winery spokesperson statement continues:

In fact, as we informed the Bee, those aboard the boat had no personal or business connection to the winery or its owners.  Furthermore, a Bee editorial claimed it’s unclear if Mr. Nunes was affiliated with the fundraiser for the boat when in fact we repeatedly told the Bee he had no affiliation with it whatsoever. The Fresno Bee also falsely reported that Alpha Omega sold wine to Russia while Mr. Nunes led an investigation of that country. We would appreciate it if the Fresno Bee would stop regurgitating false stories when it has the facts.

Nunes concluded in the ad that he does not mind the criticism of him, but the paper’s attacks on local businesses are a bridge too far:

The Bee’s band of creeping correspondents can go after me but for them to drag a family company through the mud and hurt innocent people’s livelihoods to advance their political agenda is wrong. The Fresno Bee and its parent company — McClatchy — should apologize to Alpha Omega, retract their false news stories and stop embarrassing the San Joaquin Valley.

The ads prompted the Fresno Bee’s editorial board to write a lengthy piece claiming Nunes’s claims in them were “fake news.”

In the editorial, the Bee’s first claim from Nunes that it took issue with was him saying in the ad that the newspaper “has worked closely with radical left wing groups to promote fake news stories about me.”

In response, the Bee claimed this was untrue. The newspaper’s editorial board wrote:

The Bee has never done any such thing. Does Nunes identify those groups he refers to? No. And he can’t, because such a thing never happened. The Bee’s newsroom follows time-honored ethical standards of journalism, and did for this story. One of the tenets is to let all subjects in a story have their say. But since Nunes refused to be interviewed for this story, his side could not be reported. He made it one-sided by his own choosing. By not talking to The Bee, then claiming the story to be “fake news,” Nunes reveals his strategy for dealing with Bee journalists. He also loves to combine the words ‘radical’ and ‘left wing’ to make a point to his conservative base.

The newspaper published this editorial in mid-June 2018, before evidence later emerged in November 2019 that proved Nunes correct—and the Bee incorrect.

Fusion GPS, the opposition research firm behind the now-debunked hoax of Russia collusion—which Nunes played a critical role in unraveling—was apparently behind the hit against Nunes, its leaders Glenn Simpson and Peter Fritsch wrote in their book Crime in Progress. Simpson and Fritsch wrote:

In the end, Fusion found an obscure bit of litigation that lit up the race. In May, weeks after that discovery, Nunes’s ownership stake in the Napa winery Alpha Omega became national news when The Fresno Bee reported on a lawsuit filed in California state court by a young woman who had worked serving wine at a 2015 tasting event aboard the winery’s sixty-two-foot yacht.

In other words, the Fusion GPS leaders Simpson and Fritsch admit—or perhaps, more accurately, brag—in their book about being the ones who dug this up and got the newspaper to run the story.

Simpson and Fusion GPS were of course the ones behind the now discredited anti-Trump Christopher Steele dossier that led to the Russia hoax investigation. But when that was unraveling, according to Simpson’s and Fritsch’s book, they were engaged in a smear campaign against the leading Republican in Congress who was unpacking the entire scandal—and getting his local newspaper and the newspaper chain that owns it, McClatchy, to smear him in any way they could.

Nunes’s role in unraveling Simpson’s work to spark the now-debunked Russia scandal against Trump is featured in an upcoming film by Amanda Milius, the daughter of legendary screenwriter and director John Milius, titled The Plot Against the President.The documentary is a film version of Lee Smith’s bestselling book with the same title.

But the fact that Fusion GPS went to such lengths to try to politically destroy Nunes—and the fact that McClatchy newspapers and the Fresno Bee went along with it—are particularly interesting. Fresno Bee editor Joe Kieta did not reply to Breitbart News’s request for comment about Fusion GPS’s leadership bragging about planting the anti-Nunes hit in his newspaper—something that proves Nunes’s 2018 ad against the paper correct, and the newspaper’s 2018 editorial supposedly rebutting the ad incorrect.

What’s even more interesting about this is that the yacht, winery, cocaine, and prostitutes fake news hit is not the only hit piece that McClatchy’s newspapers published on Nunes that Fusion GPS is taking credit for. From McClatchy’s D.C. bureau, reporter Kate Irby bylined two pieces—both in July 2018—that claimed respectively Nunes misusedcampaign funds for Boston Celtics tickets and a Vegas trip, and for private jet charters. It turns out, according to Simpson’s and Fritsch’s book, both came from Fusion GPS.

They wrote in the book regarding the Vegas and Boston trips that “Fusion discovered” the information that would find its way into the McClatchy report, and regarding the private plane report that “Fusion found” the information that would find its way into that followup story. Unsurprisingly, like much of Fusion GPS’s work, neither of these stories has progressed beyond the original McClatchy article–suggesting that the supposed allegations of impropriety against Nunes from 2018 did not rise to the level of something serious enough for any actual action against him. In other words, they were nothing more than another political smear.

This hyper-targeted political campaign was so unusual for Fusion GPS, which had its case against Trump crumbling thanks to Nunes’s work unraveling the dossier, that Simpson and Fritsch even admit it in the book. They wrote:

Fusion ordinarily didn’t work on congressional races, but as the [2018] election drew closer, the firm began to mull a few ways it could have an impact. Later, it would decide to design and launch a more systematic cyber-monitoring campaign, but first it went small, focusing on a single congressional district in California’s heavily agricultural Central Valley. That solidly red seat happened to have been occupied since 2003 by one Devin Nunes.

McClatchy actually had a very close working relationship with Fusion GPS, far beyond its hits on Nunes. The newspaper chain admitted in a July 2017 article that it had obtained the now-infamous and demonstrably false dossier before it was publicly released by BuzzFeed. As far back as January 2017, McClatchy was pushing content from the dossier in the immediate aftermath of its release. Fusion GPS also pushed a false story—that McClatchy published—alleging that conservative attorney Cleta Mitchell was aware of a secret Russian plot to launder money to the Trump campaign through the NRA. McClatchy even falsely reported that ex-Trump lawyer Michael Cohen was in Prague, according to cell phone records, and claimed that Special Counsel Robert Mueller had proof of that, even though Mueller’s final report debunked it.

Nunes is currently waging a number of different lawsuits against various establishment media outlets, including McClatchy, as well as against Fusion GPS.


Judge rules Sarah Palin's defamation suit against The New York Times can go to trial​

Sarah Palin's defamation lawsuit against The New York Times is moving forward and headed to trial after a federal judge ruled Friday that a jury will decide whether the newspaper acted with "actual malice" when it published a false editorial pointing to Palin as the motivation behind the 2011 assassination attempt on former Rep. Gabby Giffords (D-Ariz.).

What are the details?

Palin sued The Times in 2017 over a piece that linked materials distributed by the former Alaskan governor's political action committee and the Tucson, Arizona, mass murder at a Giffords event that left six people dead and Giffords injured.

An excerpt from the editorial — which was later corrected — read:

Was this attack evidence of how vicious American politics has become? Probably. In 2011, Jared Lee Loughner opened fire in a supermarket parking lot, grievously wounding Representative Gabby Giffords and killing six people, including a 9-year-old girl. At the time, we and others were sharply critical of the heated political rhetoric on the right. Before the shooting, Sarah Palin's political action committee circulated a map that showed the targeted electoral districts of Ms. Giffords and 19 other Democrats under stylized cross hairs.

The lawsuit has been tied up in the courts ever since, and on Friday, Manhattan Federal Judge Jed Rakoff denied The Times' request to bring the case to a close, which Law & Crime called "a major procedural win" for Palin.

"Gov. Palin brings this action to hold [former editor] James Bennett and The Times accountable for defaming her by falsely asserting what they knew to be false: that Gov. Palin was clearly and directly responsible for inciting a mass shooting at a political event in January 2011," the judge wrote

"Specifically," he continued, "on June 14, 2017, The Times published an editorial authored in the name of its Editorial Board (which represents the 'voice' of The Times) that falsely stated as a matter of fact to millions of people that Gov. Palin incited Jared Loughner's January 8, 2011, mass shooting at a political event in Tucson, Arizona."

Rakoff added, "Taken in the light most favorable to (Palin), the evidence shows Bennet came up with an angle for the editorial, ignored the articles brought to his attention that were inconsistent with his angle, disregarded the…research he commissioned, and ultimately made the point he set out to make in reckless disregard of the truth."

In reaction to the judge's decision, a spokeswoman for The Times said in a statement, "We're disappointed in the ruling but are confident we will prevail at trial when a jury hears the facts," the New York Daily Newsreported.


Thursday, August 13, 2020

Race hoaxers are rampant in the progressive movement: Jesse Smollett, Kamala Harris and Elizabeth Warren. Profiteers of color.

The Daily Beast logoNOW Board Member Accused of Posing as Woman of Color to Boost Re-Election Chances




Emily Shugerman  


This year’s board elections at the National Organization for Women were already poised to be tense: Allegations of racism at the highest levels of the feminist group have infuriated its membership and pitted current board members against one another. Now, the election is threatening to be completely upended by allegations that a candidate is claiming to be a woman of color in order to boost her election prospects.

a person posing for the camera: Handout© Provided by The Daily Beast Handout

NOW members told The Daily Beast they were shocked when BJ Star, a current board member, identified herself as Asian-American in campaign materials. Star, born Barbara Bencsik, had never identified herself as such in previous campaigns, and lists herself as white in voter registrations dating back to 1984. Multiple members said Star had not identified herself as a woman of color in past conversations about race or attended special meetings designed for women of color in NOW. 

Despite this, Star’s bio on the candidates’ website now states that she intends to build NOW’s diversity membership “as Asian-American.” (Downloaded versions of the page show this line was added sometime between July 23 and Aug. 7.) According to emails obtained by The Daily Beast, Star personally told at least one woman that she intended to run as a woman of color. 

State chapter leaders are furious over the situation, claiming Star is manipulating her identity to benefit herself in the upcoming election. Several have called for her to step down. 

“You can’t wear race like lipstick—one day you want to be red, one day you want to be black, one day you want to be brown,” said Triana Arnold-James, a Black woman and NOW member who is also running for the board. “I don’t appreciate her trying to use that to really keep true women of color out of leadership roles.”

Star has not publicly elaborated on her heritage beyond the campaign bio, and it is unclear what Asian-American ancestry she is claiming. Neither she nor representatives for NOW responded to multiple requests for comment. Whether or not she does, in fact, have Asian heritage, the dispute—which has now made its way to the national elections committee—shows the role that race has taken on in NOW’s internal leadership struggles. 

In June, a dozen women came forward to speak about their experiences of racism at NOW—including at the hands of current President Toni Van Pelt. As a result, nine board members and the majority of NOW’s state presidents have called for Van Pelt’s resignation. But Van Pelt has so far refused to resign, and the board needs three more votes in order to force her out. The upcoming board elections, then, have the power not only to change the makeup of the board, but the face of the entire NOW leadership.

Star is part of the minority of board members who have refused to vote against Van Pelt. Some members have attributed her sudden urge to run as a woman of color to a little-employed provision in the NOW bylaws that allows each region to have an extra seat on the board if it is occupied by a woman of color—a provision created to incentivize more diversity on the board. 

Kim Porteous—the state president for Florida, where Star is running—said she had multiple conversations with Star over the years about recruiting more women of color for this seat. Not once did Star say she considered herself a woman of color. Kolieka Seigle, who runs NOW’s yearly women of color caucus, said Star had not attended since at least 2015. A second member said she had not seen her at the caucus, where women of color gather with allies to discuss the issues affecting them, since at least 2013.

This year, however, Star’s board seat is newly competitive. A NOW member named Lakey Love is also running out of Florida, effectively challenging Star for the position. If Star identifies as a woman of color, she could be slotted into the extra board seat even if she loses her campaign. In fact, two members present for an election planning call told The Daily Beast that the organization may not even send ballots to the southern region, because they now consider it an uncontested race.

Even if Star did have Asian-American heritage, some NOW members said, revealing it suddenly at the age of 71, when it would be advantageous in her election, felt opportunistic and hurtful to women of color.

“To me, it’s an election ploy,” said Mariquita Anderson, a NOW member from Minnesota who is Asian-American. “She’s run for this seat before and never has mentioned being Asian-American, and all of a sudden, now? That’s too coincidental.”

“BJ is saying she’s an Asian American, but has she really walked in my shoes?” she added. “Has she been spit upon, like I have? Has she been denied jobs because her name sounds funny? I highly doubt it.” 

In emails obtained by The Daily Beast, the chair of NOW’s elections committee said she had shared the concerns about Star’s claims with the committee and would “report back once we conclude our review.”

Star’s supporters, however, have tried to flip the logic of diversity and inclusion on those who are speaking out. In emails about the issue obtained by The Daily Beast, one board member wrote, “So suddenly we no longer believe women of color??” Another member said Star had moved to Asia at one point to “learn more about her people and ancestry.” (“I’ve lived in the US all 56 years of my life and that still doesn’t make me a white person,” Anderson retorted.) 

After months of dealing with allegations of racism at NOW, members said this latest incident made them doubt that the organization could truly change.

“We’re in a time where NOW is already in a position where it’s not living up to its commitment to racial justice,” Seigle said. “And instead of doing better, y’all want to dig your heels in and actually do worse because you feel like you’re losing the organization.”

She added, “Your response is in order to fight women of color, you need to become one."

Read more at The Daily Beast.


Wednesday, August 12, 2020

Trayvon Martin and the hoax being used by the anti white race hustlers. The details make all the difference.

Protester holds sign with George Floyd, Trayvon Martin, and others, Miami, Florida, May 31, 2020 (Tverdokhlib/Shutterstock.com)

Iread the “Second Amended Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial” to be filed this week on behalf of George Zimmerman against Sybrina Fulton, Benjamin Crump, et al. without illusion. The major media will shrug off the suit, and even the trial if it comes to that, and Black Lives Matter (BLM) will likely continue on its meretricious way.

But maybe not. BLM was launched in 2013 “in response to” Zimmerman’s acquittal in the shooting death of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin a year earlier. In predicting that “Trayvon Martin will forever remain in the annals of history next to Medgar Evers and Emmett Till, as symbols for the fight for equal justice for all,” Martin family attorney Benjamin Crump captured the confused mood of much of black America.

Emmett Till, a 14-year-old Chicago boy, was brutally lynched for allegedly flirting with a white woman in 1955 Mississippi. The courageous civil rights leader Medgar Evers took a bullet in the back from a racist assassin in 1963 Mississippi. The wayward Trayvon Martin took a bullet to the chest while bashing in the head of a Hispanic man and civil rights activist he had gratuitously attacked in a multi-ethnic Florida community.

Benjamin Crump, the seeming heir to Al Sharpton’s perverse race riot fiefdom, confirmed the validity of social philosopher Eric Hoffer’s observation, “Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket.” Zimmerman’s lawsuit has the potential to show just what a racket the “civil rights” movement has become.

I attended the Zimmerman trial in July 2013, visited with Bob Zimmerman, George’s father, and surveyed the crime scene. At the time, I was writing a book on the case with a deadline six-weeks post-trial. I was guided in my research by the excellent, crowd-sourced deconstruction of the incident done by “Sundance” and his fellow “Treepers” at the blogging collective, “The Conservative Treehouse.”

We all knew Zimmerman was innocent. We all thought he would be acquitted in anything resembling a fair trial. And we all suspected, but could not prove, that the State of Florida’s star witness, the girlfriend allegedly on the phone with Martin at the moment of his death, was a flat-out impostor.

In his stunning 2019 documentary and book of the same name, The Trayvon Hoax: Unmasking the Witness Fraud That Divided America, Los Angeles filmmaker Joel Gilbert proved what we all suspected: The prosecution’s key witness, Rachel Jeantel, was an impostor. To close the case, Gilbert went and found the real girlfriend, Brittany Diamond Eugene, a then-16-year-old Haitian-American woman.

With impressive clarity, the Zimmerman lawsuit lays out the case against the defendants — Trayvon’s father Tracy Martin, Trayvon’s mother Sybrina Fulton, Eugene, Jeantel, Crump, and HarperCollins, the publisher of Crump’s compendium of lies, Legalized Genocide of Colored PeopleFirst, the facts, presented in the suit:

On February 26, 2012, Zimmerman was driving to Target at around 7 PM when he spotted Trayvon standing in the rain between two townhomes and making no attempt to get out of the rain. Zimmerman pulled over and called a non-emergency number that the neighborhood watch members had been advised to call. Trayvon, while on the phone with Defendant Eugene, then approached and circled Zimmerman’s parked car while Zimmerman was still speaking to the dispatcher. Trayvon then departed the area of Zimmerman’s car and the dispatcher repeatedly asked Zimmerman which way the person had gone, prompting Zimmerman to get out of his car to try to assist the dispatcher. Zimmerman answered “okay” in agreement after being asked by the dispatcher not to follow Trayvon and Zimmerman began walking back to his parked car.

The media routinely edited the “okay” out of Zimmerman’s response to the dispatcher. That omission allowed them to sell the notion of Zimmerman as stalker. He wasn’t. The suit continues:

When almost at his car, Trayvon appeared and approached Zimmerman from behind and called out “What’s your problem?” As Zimmerman answered, “I don’t have a problem,” Trayvon immediately punched Zimmerman in the nose, breaking it, and straddled him as he fell to the ground. Trayvon then began slamming Zimmerman’s head onto the concrete sidewalk as Zimmerman yelled for help at least 14 times according to 911 audio recordings. According to eyewitness, Jonathan Good, Trayvon was punching Zimmerman “MMA Style” while Zimmerman was on the ground.

Those who followed the trial closely knew that the “little boy” Trayvon was a half-foot taller than Zimmerman and an experienced street fighter, but there is much they did not know:

In the evening of March 18 [2012, three weeks after the shooting], Defendant Eugene was finally coerced under pressure into agreeing to make an on the record statement incriminating Zimmerman. Defendant Eugene tweeted about the extreme duress she was under, “Can’t believe this is happening to me. Crying.” She was instructed to meet with Defendants Fulton and Crump the next day after school at Defendant Fulton’s home.

By all accounts, Eugene did meet with Fulton, Trayvon’s mom and a current candidate for Miami-Dade county commissioner, at Fulton’s home on March 19. Eugene also talked to Crump, possibly in person but certainly on the phone:

In that recorded call, Defendant Eugene repeated almost word for word Defendant Crump’s false narrative that Trayvon was just trying to get home with candy for his little brother when attacked by Zimmerman based on skin color.

On March 20, Crump played this phone interview at a nationally televised press conference, declaring boldly, “We have all the evidence now,” and, “Arrest George Zimmerman for the murder of Trayvon Martin!” The media loved this story and reported Crump’s version uncritically. On March 23, President Obama famously aligned himself with Crump by saying, “If I had son, he’d look like Trayvon.” Obama was unaware that Trayvon’s life had descended into a street-level Inferno of burglary, gun dealing, drugs, fighting, and school suspensions.

To compel the arrest of Zimmerman, Crump needed Eugene, the phone witness, to lie to state prosecutors. Along the way, however, she got cold feet. On April 2, when the state attorneys arrived in Miami, Sybrina Fulton directed them to Eugene’s home. Fulton knew the way. She had driven Eugene there two weeks prior. Upon being told Eugene was visiting a friend, the prosecutors and Fulton headed to a second address. When they knocked on the door, the plot took a semi-comic turn:

Defendant Jeantel appeared and claimed that she was “Diamond Eugene.” Defendant Eugene could in no way be mistaken for Defendant Jeantel, who was 2 years older, 5 inches taller, and about 120 pounds heavier than Defendant Eugene. Defendant Fulton saw Defendant Jeantel and immediately called Defendant Eugene, who tweeted at about that same time at 6:27 PM “Trayvon Martin Mom just called me” and at 6:32 PM “She thought I was Trayvon Girlfriend, Asking Me Hella Questions. Confused.”

I say only semi-comic because this outlandish judicial fraud, the most consequential in memory, wrecked Zimmerman’s life and ultimately set up the launch of the nation’s most racially intimidating organization since the KKK, namely BLM. In my book, Unmasking Obama: The Fight to Tell the True Story of a Failed Presidency, I explore Obama’s role in selling BLM’s lies to the public first in Florida and later in Ferguson — “Hands up, don’t shoot” — Missouri.

The Zimmerman lawsuit contains much more detail, most of it damning, all of it irrefutable. If the suit is to have any chance of restoring sanity to the civil rights movement, the conservative media, starting at the top, will have to shame their mainstream brethren into covering it.

This won’t be easy. A generation ago, journalists saw themselves as Atticus Finch standing tall at the county jail demanding due process. Starting with the Zimmerman trial, they joined the mob out front demanding the head of the innocent.

Jack Cashill’s new book, Unmasking Obama: The Fight to Tell the True Story of a Failed Presidency, will be published on August 18.


Friday, July 31, 2020

BLM founded on the myth of Michael Brown demise. Criminals live by the lie


In 2014 shooting of Michael Brown, St. Louis' top prosecutor announces no charges against Darren Wilson

‘Darren Wilson could have handled the situation differently and if he had, Michael Brown might still be alive,’ the prosecutor said

St. Louis County, Mo., prosecutor said Thursday that he will not be charging the White police officer who shot 18-year-old Michael Brown in 2014, after quietly reopening the investigation.

Civil rights leaders and Brown's mother reportedly hoped that Prosecuting Attorney Wesley Bell, who became the county’s first Black prosecutor in January 2019, might reopen the investigation into police officer Darren Wilson, who shot Brown six years ago.

Bell told reporters today that his decision was “one of the most difficult things I’ve had to do."

POSTHUMOUS LETTER FROM JOHN LEWIS PUBLISHED

But after a five month investigation into the case’s evidence, witness statements and forensic reports, he came to the conclusion that “we cannot prove that he” committed murder or manslaughter.

The massive demonstrations that followed the shooting of Brown helped to solidify the Black Lives Matter movement in Ferguson, Mo., and around the country.

A federal investigation and a grand jury cleared Wilson of all charges months after Brown's death in 2014.

Bell didn’t face any backlash when he re-reviewed the investigation into Brown’s shooting because Wilson was never charged or tried, and there is no statute of limitations on murder charges.

Brown, accompanied by his friend, was told to get out of the middle to the street in a residential neighborhood by Wilson, when Brown approached the police vehicle. In the entire altercation, which lasted about 90 seconds, Wilson fired a total of twelve bullets, six of which struck Brown in the front of his body.

Witnesses said Brown, who was unarmed, had his hands up when he was shot, but federal investigators and the grand jury said the evidence showed otherwise.


Brown’s body was left in the street for four hours, which provoked outrage among his family and local residents, prompting the furious protests that ensued.

“Although this case represents one of the most significant moments in St. Louis’s history, the question for this office was a simple one: Could we prove beyond a reasonable doubt that when Darren Wilson shot Michael Brown he committed murder or manslaughter under Missouri law?” Mr. Bell said during a press conference Thursday.

“After an independent and in-depth review of the evidence, we cannot prove that he did.”

Bell noted that just because Wilson was not found guilty of murder or manslaughter, he had not been exonerated.

“There are so many points at which Darren Wilson could have handled the situation differently and if he had, Michael Brown might still be alive,” Bell told reporters.

The Justice Department declined to charge Wilson, but released a highly critical report that noted racial bias in the Ferguson police department and the county courts.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Older Posts Home