In The Guardian today, Oliver Laughland preaches to the choir:
Nearly three decades before the rambunctious billionaire began his run for president â€“ before he called for a ban on Muslims entering the United States, for the expulsion of all undocumented migrants, before he branded Mexicans as â€œrapistsâ€ and was accused of mocking the disabled â€“ Trump called for the reinstatement of the death penalty in New York following a horrific rape case in which five teenagers were wrongly convicted.
The miscarriage of justice is widely remembered as a definitive moment in New Yorkâ€™s fractured race relations. But Trumpâ€™s intervention â€“ he signed full-page newspaper advertisements implicitly calling for the boys to die â€“ has been gradually overlooked as the businessmanâ€™s chances of winning the Republican nomination have rapidly increased. Now those involved in the case of the so-called Central Park Five and its aftermath say Trumpâ€™s rhetoric served as an unlikely precursor to a unique brand of divisive populism that has powered his rise to political prominence in 2016.
But let’s not take that at face value, and look at the evidence, as written by a lawyer:
When Raymond Santana was being driven to the precinct the night of the wilding, he blurted out: “I had nothing to do with the rape. All I did was feel the woman’s tits.” Wait! Who said anything about rape? The cops had not asked him about any rape.
Two of the defendants, Santana and Richardson, independently brought investigators to the precise location of the attack on the jogger, something only the perpetrators could have known.
The evidence against Richardson also included his vivid description of the attack — given on videotape, in the presence of his father — and a deep scratch wound on his cheek that he admitted was from the jogger. Oh, also — the crotch of the underwear from the night of the attack was stained with semen, grass, dirt and debris.
Contrary to media reports, there was hair, blood or semen on all five of the defendants.
Both stories cannot be true. It is typical of Leftists to force a politically-motivated result, and then claim that it was justice and all along, what common sense says was true was not true. This forces our population to separate between the people who will obey whatever the herd says because they think it makes them look smart and good, and those who are still independent — and probably should be crushed.
Laughland mentions none of the evidence. He relies on conclusions that are based in propaganda. It is obvious that he is a liar who serves a political purpose. The best part is that you can say this to his face and he can do nothing. Not only is it not defamatory to say the truth, but he would not want an examination of this information in a courtroom, in the press, or among his friend group. So call him a liar. He’ll just slink away to be a hipster somewhere else.