MSNBC'S Chris Hayes On The "Character Assassination" Of Trayvon Martin: "The Racial Backlash Is Now At Full Tilt"
April 01, 2012 12:14 pm ET
From the April 1 edition of MSNBC's Up with Chris Hayes:
Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.
And the irony is that at it's base, this is "check out how horribly one-sided the media has been on this" story.
The fact is, both sides have failed miserably here. On MSNBC, Zimmerman was a 240-lb (they never get tired of telling us how big he was) racist with a gun who stalked and slaughtered an innocent little boy because, well, he's a racist with a gun. Go to Fox, and Zimmerman was defending his property and Treyvon was a hoodie-wearing gangsta out looking for trouble, with a police record the race-hustlers are trying to cover up. My guess is that the truth is somewhere in between, but we'll never get it from either MSNBC OR Fox, because they are too busy talking past those who disagree with their one-sided viewpoints to wait for the facts to emerge.
Our media, at it's best- which is to say, at it's worse.
But congratulations on fully crossing over into concern troll-dom, at long last.
Oh, thank you for mansplaining it to us, O Wise Prophet of White Privilege.
And spare me the condescension. I am not going to apologize because I don't take my cues from some media Star Chamber.
"O Wise Prophet of White Privilege" -- you ought to be ashamed of that, but I doubt you are capable.
Fixed. Yeah, I'm just the next Hitler, aren't I?
I will spare you the condescension; I know you hate rivals.
Listen to the right wingers here and in the media. Clearly we need to ensure the safety of gun toting paranoid racists so they don't have to even be suspected of murdering people who don't look the way they want them to look.
I propose the "cut of his jib" law. Now you don't even have to claim you were "standing your ground" in those cases when you really need to stalk, assault, and murder a random stranger. Now you can just state "I didn't like the cut of his jib!" and you're acquitted on the spot.
Brought to you by the NFSBNRBRNRA*
*National formerly sane, but now run by reactionary nutjobs rifle association
I agree with JJ that Zimmerman has been tried and convicted in the media - but that's not unusual in the modern era. What is troubling is that all of the facts continue to line up against him and given that, one begins to wonder if any of his statements are trustworthy.
1. Local watch person sees individual he thinks could be trouble - follows person in vehicle, calls police.
2. At some point, leaves vehicle and confronts person, against advise of authority.
3. During confrontation, shoots and kills unarmed person. Claims to be in fear of life and after having been assaulted.
4. Police reports corroborate some of his statements (re broken nose, bloody), however video evidence seems to indicate otherwise.
Given that Zimmerman purposefully did not follow instructions at point 2, no real element of stand your ground plays in his favor. The intent of such a law is that you have such a right in a defensive situation, not a confrontation of your own making. Also, given point 4, and that there doesn't seem to be any evidence of significant injury or medical treatment, the facts seemingly lead to at least the bringing of a charge of involuntary manslaughter.
Let the jury sort it out.
I would disagree. I think it's fair to amend our laws to allow for self defense, but laws like "stand your ground" are too broad brushed in their scope. You are creating a one-size-fits-all legal loophole and generic defense that allows exactly the kind of situation we have unfolding here.
This case wouldn't have ever seen a jury if it hadn't been for a national media uproar.
After weeks of defending Zimmerman and the vigilante mindset, and demonizing Martin, the new goalpost position seems to be loosely citing that some Democrats ( apparently a lot in FL) voted to pass 'Stand Your Ground' type laws.
And the zombies won't even notice, just like with the Iraq war.
The remaining "defense" for Zimmerman was that he acted in "self defense" offering up the idea that the young man he had been stalking first in his SUV and then on foot, suddenly whirled around and attacked him -- curiously only a few steps away from his intended destination. Zimmerman's defenders told us of frightful injuries he received -- injuries that a curiously unseen in the high definition video recording taken at the police station less than an hour after Martin was gunned down.
Say what you will about attempts to portray Martin as a "saint" (although that can hardly be said about what we're seeing in what Hayes offers here). Graffiti and the possession of a screwdriver, and empty bags of weed notwithstanding Trayvon Martin was guilty of nothing on the night he was killed. And we're only be treated to his far from meriting execution misdeeds, and "scary" tweets, and "scary" photos (ooooh, grillz--yeah, that's a reason to grab your guns) as Zimmerman's "defense" grows weaker and weaker.
The right doesn't care about Zimmerman's due process, jjamele. They only wish to "defend" a terrible gun law.
Listen to the 911 tapes and you will have more than an idea too. Find out from Zimmerman's own call that he called 911 because he saw a "suspicious looking" dude walking on his turf. Find out that, despite the 911 operator telling him not to pursue, Zimmerman exited his vehicle and chased down a 17 year old whose only crime was that he walked to the store and back. Find out, from others' calls, that prior to Zimmerman silencing him with a gunshot, Martin was SCREAMING for help.
Then put yourself in that 17 year old's place. Consider that it is dark and rainy, and you are minding your own business, walking back from the convenience store with a bag of Skittles and a bottle of iced tea. You notice a vehicle slowly following you and you turn to look at it. You can't really tell if it is a cop car or not. It is dark, and there IS something on the roof. Could be a light bar. So you take a couple of steps toward it, and notice that it is not a light bar, it is just a roof rack.
It is dark, it is rainy, and someone is casing you. Are you about to be abducted?
I don't know about you, but I am going to hightail it out of there. Then, once the guy comes out of his vehicle and starts to chase me, I am SURE that I am about to be abducted, molested, or worse.
But never mind. You are probably right. Trayvon deserved to be killed because he didn't just stand there and wait to see if the guy was bent on being a bad guy. He should have just assumed that the guy who had been stalking him wanted nothing more than information.
Oh, and the fact that Martin, the ONLY person in that scenario who should have been able to defend himself via the "Stand Your Ground" law, is quite dead.
And Barr and Jones? Puh-leeze! The actions of others don't detract from the killing itself...
Hardly worth replying to, but I'll give it a shot:
1. No, I haven't researched Zimmerman's past behavior. My guess is, you haven't either. But in case I'm wrong, please enlighten me- how many kids has he shot? How many times as he been convicted of assault?
2. "He's a full fledged racist who walks around looking to shoot some blacks"- you know this, how, exactly? Fact is, you don't. But it fits your preferred worldview, so there it is, and anyone who suggest that maybe we should see the evidence before condemning anyone is a troll, right?
IMAGINE THAT.
That's what you have to offer? This, somehow, is supposed to mean that this shooting and this killing are less serious?
What would be the minimum number of shootings required to raise some outrage from you, jjamele?
Good to know we get a pass on the first shooting.
I doubt that Zimmerman had any thing but crap to tell Trayvon when he approached him.
He might have even used the 'N' word for all we know.
In 2005 Zimmerman was arrested for assaulting a police officer and resisting arrest. Both are third degree felony in Florida, he bargained, and opted for, and completed a Diversion type program, so the charges were dropped and the case expunged.
Incidentally that case he was butting in on a friends situation with a police officer. There was also an arrest for assaulting his girl friend that went no where.
He made 46, 911 calls in 2011 and not one of those calls resulted in an arrest. One of his suspicious black subjects was a 9 year old boy.
In 2010, the son of a Sanford cop assaulted a homeless black man, and officer on the scene let him go free.
Playing the contrarian is fun, I suppose. It doesn't mean not choosing which battles wisely.
Admitting that you were wrong is such a pansy liberal thing to do.
People have already addressed your second "point" so I won't bother.
Is this post short enough to keep your attention and garner a response?
Virginia magistrates are judicial officers, but they are not considered "judges" and do not possess trial jurisdiction.
I just thought you might not want to say it was that county his pop was a magistrate. I had thought that it was, too.
I used to have a customer who was a long-retired circuit-court judge in Southwest Texas and had moved to the DFW area upon his retirement; he should not have been driving, period. He couldn't pass the eye exam with help.
He told me that he simply went to a local judge and had him write him an exception.
"Brotherhood" pull.
I know it's not as good as those stories about kidnapped pretty white women, but the media needs to fixate on something. I wonder why this story has all the right wingers and people "who have best friends that are black" find this particular story so infuriating?
Why now do they speak up against sensational media? Why has this story suddenly granted them an epiphany? OMG! The media is fixating on particular cases? When did this start happening!?
Oh! This time it's a black teenage boy. I guess that changes everything for people like concern troll jjamelle.
My post was pretty short, so how many "strawmen" could I have made?
Sounds more like an admission that you got nothin'...which is what you started with.
Anything Hipster Troll disagrees with, obviously.
So, since MMFA, unlike Right Wing Propaganda Machine sites, will continue to allow you to post (even lies) as long as you don't seriously and repeatedly violate the TOS, what do we have to do to change that "pretty much" to "completely"?
Will more facts do it?
Look, we defended a Latino in the Martin thing, we CAN'T hate Latinos.
"Actually, they did find the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq."
"Actually, Valerie Wilson revealed her own identity."
"Actually, Trayvon Martin jumped on the guy and was smashing his head into the concrete."
Once those straw men get raised, you can't ever argue about the main point, which of course is the intent of the people who raise the straw men -- to prevent an argument about the main point.
I will say this about Trayvon Martin's shooting going national -- every new piece of information seems to undermine Zimmerman.
The lastest is the acoustics experts who said they're all but certain that the one yelling for help in the background of the 911 calls is not Zimmerman. Clearly, if he's lying about that, the rest of his story is suspect.
I don't know what's true, at least not yet, but I do know that each thing that becomes public seems to be in conflict with Zimmerman's story.
The story that the cops filled out more than one report, and only in the second one do they mention injuries to Zimmerman -- if true, that undermines Zimmerman.
The video that appears not to show the injuries the cops claim Zimmerman had -- if true, that undermines Zimmerman. If he really was hurt, he'd better produce photos or a doctor's report right off, or his version is going to remain suspect.
People like Spike Lee do us no good with their stupid tweets and idiotic comments -- they enable conservatives to raise false equivalency arguments.
Media reporter:
"Liberal guy has just spoken about specific language in the bill and the historic arguments presented by state supreme courts regarding it's implementation, conservative guy interrupted him and screamed about birth certificates and death panels for two minutes...we'll just have to call it even and let you, the viewer decide."
Martin had no gun
Martin had Skittles and tea
Zimmerman had a gun and an attitude
Zimmerman targeted and stalked the kid
Zimmerman pulled the trigger
any way you add it up you are a fool and a liar and Zimmerman is a murderer.
Lending further credence to the theory that Zimmerman didn't shoot him in self-defense, but because he wanted to . . .
If you followed their "the Second Amendment means everyone should be armed" logic to its ultimate conclusion, you'd have Martin and Zimmerman shooting at each other in the dark and in a residential neighborhood. I wonder why no one conservatives and NRA types are sounding off in favor of THAT?
. . . everyone would have their own personal stockpile of nuclear/chemical/biological weapons . . .
Even one of the co-authors of the law states that it was never meant to be a "pursue and confront" law. I mean, really, isn't the Right Wing Propaganda Machine constantly telling us the intentions of the Founding Fathers(tm) in writing the Constitution? Here we actually have one of the framers of a law telling us his interpretation of that law and they want to ignore him.
If you believe Zimmerman's story (I do not, but FOX, hate radio, and the entire Right Wing Propaganda Machine seem to) then Martin had every right to Stand His Ground(tm). There doesn't really seem to be any valid reason for them to be on Zimmerman's side here, except for the skin tone thing.
Zimmerman's weight is relevant, for reasons you surely grasp.
A few recent developments you might want to know about;the funeral director said that there were no signs of a struggle on Martin's body;videotape of Zimmerman at the police station showed no trauma to his head, contradicting the "head repeatedly slammed against ground" defense, and voice experts are denying the possibility of Zimmerman being the one who screamed for help.
You also might want to look into Zimmerman's history of 911 calls.
If the truth is "somewhere" in between, it would appear to be very close to the MSNBC side, from everything that's out there.
But yeah, the propaganda mill sure doesn't seem a bit interested that Martin was minding his own d@mn business when Zimmerman decided he'd found his latest chance to feel Important, either.
As to Chris Hayes'coverage and covergae in general,who has said that Trayvon Martin was a child saint?Who said Zimmerman was a racist thug?The assessment is more so that he may have racially profiled Trayvon Martin who had committed no crime and was unarmed so a limited threat at best!.What made him suspicious to Zimmerman?I see all kinds of people wearing hoodies even when it's not raining.He was walking in an unfamiliar area so may have been checking out address numbers to make sure he took the correct return route.
Being aware of Zimmerman watching and following(which is stalking) what stalking),he may have reacted in a way that Zimmerman would call even more suspicious behavior.He's 17 years old,it was dark out and he is being followed by an unknown man.Think of that and show some empathy.That is what most people are doing.He had a reason to be very scared,esp if he saw that this man had a weapon.Zimmerman is 28 and armed.He did not have a history free of violence as Treyvon did.The other youthful transgressions may be issues but are not particularly relevant where as Zimmerman's history of following residents had been complained about.His numerous calls to Police reported a lot of normal activity that was not criminal and perhaops not even suspicious to most people.When you just look at these facts,most fair minded people see Zimmerman's behavior far more questionable than this young man.It is a false equivalence to try to make their apparent faults as equal.Isn't Zimmerman supposed to show adult behavior and judgment? Where was it when he followed Trayvon even before he was told he didn't need to do that?Chris Hayes ,like others is only trying to speak for teh person that can't speak for himself!The Police listened to Zimmerman and gave him a huge benefit of the doubt.They came out right away defending Zimmerman and their decison not to arrest him.They did no such thing for Trayvon Martin.
Trayvon Martin's father retraces his son's final steps.
Very often the investigations before it even gets to the Grand Jury, for an indictiment, takes a long time.
I know. LET'S HAVE AN EFFING TRIAL and find out. MSNBC wants a trial. Fox doesn't.
Since Fox decided they are.
The same way Fox decided the five members of the NBPP were representative of all blacks . . .
As for Roseanne Barr and Spike Lee or any of the other of these dimbulbs who made stupid, dumba** comments, they should be ashamed.
My suggestion to you, jjamele, is to quit watching these networks since they cause you so much distress. I quit watching them a long time ago.
How can you compare shooting a 17 year old child to death with someone else saying some thing that was criticized and retracted.
A child is dead for no good reason.
Also, I heard the 'kid' was actually a gang member and 'skittles' is the term those ruffians use for 'AK-47s', so Zimmerman saved the neighborhood from turning into a Bosnian-like war zone; good for him!
I'm just a regular Joe who gets his info from Fox News and I base all my important decisions on their awesome input!
First he accuses MSNBC and CNN of having already convicted Zimemrman on the air, which would be very different from Fox news acquitting and making excuses for him. Then he proceeds to compare this to the Rodney King case (as Brent Bozell talks about Tiwana Brawley(sp)) because apparently these media conservatives see black people as nothing more then a series of racially charged episodes and events.
Maybe the moral of the story is that the media will rally around an African-American accused of a crime, provided he's the best player on a championship-caliber sports team. Random kids are still on their own, of course.
Have we already forgotten Terry Schiavo, the Duke LaCrosse team, Amanda Knox, Elizabeth Smart, or any of the other number of sensational media stories that become the national focus for weeks at a time?
Suddenly Fox news and other right wing media is above all that when the story highlights the glaring flaws in the gun lobby written "stand your ground" laws.
Fox news: Your source for predictable partisan hypocrisy.
I think (and understand that this is simply my opinion, but it is an educated one based on what I have researched about Zimmerman) that Zimmerman purposely set out to do harm to Martin. The fact that, despite the 911 operator telling him not to pursue coupled with his muttered "these (bleep)s always get away" to he other muttered "(bleep)ing c00ns" tell me that he had every intention of killing him one.
I think that Martins screams for help made him hurry up the affair, because he was afraid that someone might show up and interfere with his hunt.
1) He would have been wearing the recommended fluorescent colored vest, while patrolling.
2) He would not have been armed with a gun, against NWA rules.
3) He would have taken the recommended NWA training provided by the Sheriff's Office.
4) He would have left it up to the Police to handle once he notified 911, and they told him they did not need him to follow the victim.
Zimmerman had attended NWA meetings held by Sanford Chief of Police, he was well aware of the rules he was violating.
Chris Tulko director of the Neighborhood Watch Association for the National Sheriff's Association, made a public statement that Zimmerman broke cardinal rules.
I can't get it to post but the Miami Herald, had an article showing more examples of Zimmerman's thug tactics. Titled "George Zimmerman: Self-appointed watchman or racist killer? Trayvon Martin-MiamiHerald.com
Zimmerman self appointed watchman or racist killer.
I don't have a CHL, but I assume that one of the rules might be "if you know that you are going somewhere that doesn't allow carrying, leave the gun at home." After all, it is amazingly simple for someone to break into your vehicle and take that gun that you left under the seat.
Seriously how in the hell can someone be an executioner without taking a life?
Martin was stalked by an armed vigilante, Zimmerman.
Florida has a "Stand Your Ground" law.
Zimmerman confronted Martin, who in the worst case, stood his ground and defended himself from Zimmerman. Martin got the best of Zimmerman in a fight started by Zimmerman.
How can the person who stood his ground, Martin, be anything but innocent under Florida law?
BTW, Happy Fool's day, King, and in case you missed it, we've got another internet Dirty Harry creeping around and slingin' iron. These teabaggers are always ready to shoot out their own car windows, just to keep us free from Negro Attacks.
I like his first sentence about bankers never breaking into houses like all of the scary black guys do.
Bankers don't need to break in, they foreclose. I've had my house robbed but never been thrown out. I lost a camera, a couple of bucks and some lose change. So far, I haven't been tossed out by a thieving banker.
They may have seen too many of those 70s cop shows, where an elbow in a jacket takes out a car window with a sharp jab. Assuming they're in a newer model vehicle with the windows up and the door locked ( safe assumption for paranoid racists driving on the wrong side of the tracks), an unarmed or knife-wielding thug should earn more laughter than gun-play.
Yeah, the analogy seemed a bit much for him.
A sample from that thread from dimlighter:
The internet: where every man is rich, handsome, and a stud.
{And every rightwingnut troll is super-rich, is dating a stripper, and is a retired military hero . . . and whose English skills are lacking}
But even funnier when they come here, sounding like 12 year olds who can't read, and bragging about their James Bond-style lives.
At first I was happy because I thought he decide to come back to us. But then I reread the quote and realize that BJF would have never gone out on a lake in his 38' boat while complementing anything. He'd have done it whilst he was complementing.
Ah, but there's always a new crop of friends that want to play. Trolls come in. Trolls go out. So eager to push their mis-communication. They never miss a beat.
Mag could always be counted on to appear on any thread involving Glenn Beck, in order to "explain" what Beck "really meant" {it was for this reason I always referred to him as "MagCynic, Beck's Intern"} . . . Mag conspicuously disappeared around the time Beck did from Fox -- hmm . . .
BJF was, along with K1Dork, one of the most ridiculous trolls ever to grace this site . . . what I found most entertaining about him -- aside from his gun collection, hot black girlfriend, and life in Spain and/or Ireland -- was his absolute conviction that he was superior as a human being to President Obama; he once stated that he would "never lower himself to meet [the President]" . . . to me, this was emblematic of the mindset of teabagging rightwingnutjobs; these people have little education or accomplishments and are unable to accept a black man with more of both occupying the White House -- the only way they can feel better about themselves is to denigrate him . . .
It was mostly painfully boring, mindless right wing navel-gazing, except for his comments on race. That part was fascinating.
The guy is not that bright, despite his working the sh*t out of his word-a-day calendar, but the condescending and dismissive way he commented on the president ( and Melissa Harris Perry, I believe) was actually interesting. The dull details of wingnut thought, the politics, are so tired and repetitive that I tune them out. It's the accidental glimpses into their psychology that I like.
I always referred to him as "Joe Buttcrack", since his postings seem to originate there . . . a regular poster, don't remember who {might've been bintx}, said all he did was post droppings here, then re-post our replies on his blog.
How sad is your life when you have to resort to C&P replies from a site you hate in order to get traffic for your blog?
The one I was referring to was Slow Cowboy (nee Rational Conservative). He wasn't a flamethrower, he was one of those Ned Flanders type passive aggressive trolls who thought he was much smarter than he was, and thought lying politely was ok.
If you want a taste, I've still got it bookmarked. Not sure if I can link to the individual entry headings, but try this, or this.
If that doesn't work, here's the link to the home page. Check out entries titled "Herman Cain - Game Changer" and "I admit it" for some cringe-worthy pseudo-intellectual babbling about race from a white guy who sounds like he's never met anybody who isn't white.
The "Tale of Two Stars" is pretty weird, too.
A wee bit of racism mayhap?
Again I'll say that I believe the right doesn't care about Zimmerman. It's their precious gun law they wish to defend. It's an argument I would listen to if they were to talk about what they feel are the merits of that law while making it clear that Zimmerman strayed from its intentions. Right now they've only focused on smearing Martin, waving a finger of shame at Spike Lee and Roseanne (we're all pretty much in agreement that they were reckless and wrong), and screaming, "Hey! Zimmmerman's not white! He's not white! So why are you lefties so obsessed with seeing racism in the death of this hoodie wearing empty bag of weed carrying 'gangsta' that we uncovered a picture of wearing grillz."
This, "we've got very good reasons to be afraid of brown people, and here are our best entirely unrelated to the topic examples," is something we've seen so many times before. If it's immigration, or the location of a community center being built by Muslims, or a birth certificate, or a poet being invited to speak at the White House, or the guest list for a President's birthday celebration, or a young man who just looked too damned suspicious to an armed guy looking for trouble. These idiots continue to amaze me with how deep they're willing to dive into their self created cesspool of hate hoping to bring something "reasonable" to the surface that will somehow justify the unreasonable.
I cannot even imagine the horror Trayvon's mother must feel every time she hears that 911 tape and recognizes her little boy's voice screaming in terror.
Unfortunately it seems his election had the opposite effect.
Even more sadly, cynical pundits use this "there is no more racism" attitude as a basis to attack anyone who dares to bring the issue up.
Trayvon Martin would be sitting in jail awaiting trial -- if he was lucky enough not to be shot at the scene by police responding to the 911 calls. And had the police treated him the same way they've treated George Zimmerman, all the people who are out there screaming that Zimmerman is being tried and convicted by the media would be freaking out that a dangerous killer is allowed to walk free because he could claim self defense... and the loudest voices would be the pansies who try to pretend that no one would ever take THEIR gun away from them.
Or does the law only apply to the survivor? The only person not arrested is the person that survives the encounter. That's why Trayvon's blood was tested for drugs and alcohol and not Zimmerman's. If Trayvon had killed Zimmerman, then Zimmerman's blood would have been tested.
And if the law is really stand your ground, how does that apply when you are stalking another person.
Is the real result (intent?) of this law to have more shootouts?
Does this law apply to drive-by shootings? If somone is encroaching on your turf, does that give you the right to shoot them? ie. does ground = turf?
Does the law say anything about illegal activities, or is your fear of them all it takes to justifiably shoot them? In that case, Republicans really scare me. Paul Ryan REALLY scares me. He's trying to rob my Social Security. Does the stand your ground apply?
If someone can help me with the law, I have some follow-up questions about how you can rush to judgment and convict someone who hasn't been charged with a crime.