I could have given a large sum of money to a conservative tea party type group and been harassed by the IRS.  It could have been me.

I could have had my emails and phone records combed through, without a warrant.  It could have been me.

I could have been serving my country at an embassy, calling for help and receiving none. It could have been me.

But what it could not have been is me breaking a man's nose while I was on top of him and beating his head against the concrete because he asked me what I was doing in a neighborhood that had seen a rash of robberies. I've never done that.

The narrative seems intentionally perpetuated and void of any of the facts of the case.

Why perpetuate the narrative?  To keep the IRS being used as a political tool by those in power, to keep the NSA collection of private data, and the Benghazi debacle investigation all out of the news.  And it is working.

And why ignore the facts of the Martin case?  Why conjure up race when those in the courtroom agree it was not a factor?  And why declare "stand your ground" bad law when it also was not a factor in this case?  The answer is simply to create the false narrative to accomplish part one, i.e. to control the headlines.

The President is wrong to foment racial tensions by ignoring the realities of this case.

It could have been you? It could have been you hundreds of times in Chicago this past year.  So where was the outrage then? 

Phillip Johnson