Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Violence Erupts, Two Police Officers Shot in Riots After Breonna Taylor Grand Jury Decision

Violence Erupts, Two Police Officers Shot in Riots After Breonna Taylor Grand Jury Decision

The mayor issued a curfew before the grand jury announcement.

It didn’t take long for Louisville to erupt after the grand jury only indicted one officer in the Breonna Taylor case. He wasn’t even indicted in her death.

Riots and protests started almost right after the indictment came out. Someone caught a U-Haul carrying signs and supplies.

The police confirmed two officers have been shot.

Police Shot

Rioters have shot at police.

Riots in Other Cities

Previous Reporting

Louisville Mayor Greg Fischer issued a curfew for tonight before the attorney general announced the indictment.

People also boarded-up businesses and federal buildings in anticipation of possible violence.

WAVE3News reported that protesters planned non-violent demonstrations across the city:

“This tells us that they want to cage us in [and] actually direct us in the direction they want us to go so they can harm us,” protester Kejohn Jennings said.

Protests in Louisville have continued for 118 days straight in the name of Breonna Taylor. While many have been non-violent, the first few nights resulted in shootings, fires, and damage to local businesses.

“All we want… make a decision whether it’s good or bad, but they boarding up like they ready for war,” Rosie Henderson said.

Henderson has protested at Jefferson Square Park since the unrest began in May and she hopes things will remain peaceful no matter the grand jury’s decision.

“If we don’t control the narrative then they win, as soon as we not peaceful and we start tearing up then they win,” she said. “All we can do is pray no one gets hurt.”

I believe that a lot of people do not want violence or destruction, but rioters always infiltrate:


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Guessing by the time I get up in the morning the damage will be extensive

Nice reporting.

I feel sorry for the business owners who have the bad luck to have business properties in the area. They don’t have the legal right to use lethal force to defend their property from these a-hole thugs, and the thugs know that and take advantage of it.

But guess what a-holes? Property owners can ignore the law too, just like you thugs do. And when you’re lying dead in the street with a bullet hole in your head, it’s not going to matter that the property owner didn’t have the legal right to shoot you for breaking his shop’s windows and looting his merchandise, because you’re still going to be dead.

Just a matter of time before some pissed off property owners decide to go Rooftop Korean on BLM’s asses. And when they do, most Americans will have no pity for the dead “mostly peaceful” rioters and looters.

    DaveGinOly in reply to Observer. | September 23, 2020 at 7:44 pm

    Fight back against the prosecution of those who “dare” defend themselves against communists, “revolutionaries,” and other enemies of the Constitution and the Republic!

    Everyone reading this message should silently pledge to themselves that should they be seated on a jury trying the case of a patriot who acted in defense of himself or the Republic, that they will return a verdict of “not guilty,” and will be unmoved by any arguments from fellow jurors to the contrary.

    Please make and keep a copy of this post and re-post at any appropriate article or web site. Send this to friends and family, ask them to forward it to others. Get this word out. If prosecutors are going to wage war against the defenders of the Republic, they will do it in the face of our (perfectly legal) resistance.

      CommoChief in reply to DaveGinOly. | September 23, 2020 at 8:28 pm


      Does that include homeowners insisting upon peaceful, no tactical entry service of search warrants? If so then sure.

        The Friendly Grizzly in reply to CommoChief. | September 23, 2020 at 8:31 pm

        But, but… what about the War on Drugs?!?

        /sarc And I agree with you.

        The Friendly Grizzly in reply to CommoChief. | September 23, 2020 at 9:13 pm

        Whoever gave you the downtick is probably a badge licker. They are part of the problem..

        Really? So, police, serving a search warrant should stand around outside a person’s door and negotiate for entry while they destroy evidence? Or maybe just call the resident on the phine, tell them you have a search warrant and to bring the contraband to the station and turn it in? Is that what you are advocating? How about serving an arrest warrant for a serious, violent felony? Surround the house with a hundred LEO for hours, days, weeks, months? How long does society have to wait for legal documents to be served on a suspected criminal?

        You people are a hoot. Have one of your family members beaten, raped or killed and the police send the suspect a letter to turn himself in. Yeah, you’re gonna put up with that. Warrants are served on criminals or suspected criminals. These people do not obey the rules. That is why they are criminals. And, that is why we have police.

        Do you people have a clue what the real world is like?

          CommoChief in reply to Mac45. | September 23, 2020 at 10:45 pm


          I am not advocating that serving a search warrant is a negotiation. I am simply supporting the 4th Amendment. The value of the 4th Amendment is that the search must be ‘reasonable’. Using a tactical entry to effect the warrant is not ‘reasonable’ except in narrow circumstances.

          LEO has to get a warrant. LEO then needs to simply knock on the door and when the occupant comes to the door show them the warrant and demand entry. That seems simple to me.

          If the occupant refuses entry then ‘take the door’. If the occupant doesn’t come to the door in a.reasonable amount of time then likewise ‘take the door’. That seems reasonable and simple.

          Reasonable meaning come when the occupant is home and awake. Do not come predawn raid tactical style. That is not necessary for the overwhelming majority of warrants.

          For the very few situations that justify a tactical entry then that should remain an option if a judge signs off on it. No one is saying tactical entry should never be used, we are saying it should not be routinely used.

          I do live in the real world. I have seen unbelievable things in Iraq and Kosovo and elsewhere. I have done some pretty awful things in my time. Those actions were justified in combat under wartime ROE, not against Citizens of my Nation inside their homes within my Nation. The militaristic culture that has become the norm in many LE Agencies is not necessary, justified or prudent IMO.

          My Father, my Grandfather, My Father in law and one uncle were policeman. I have a great appreciation for LEO. They have a very difficult job with low pay and little thanks.

          Unfortunately what my Father derided as ‘the badge and gun mentality’, meaning if you have a badge and gun your actions and others with a badge and gun are automatically correct, has become prevalent.

          LEO are losing their natural allies of law abiding everyday Citizens because of this mentality. Many of us leaped to reflexively defend LEO in the past. Over the last several years there have been many occasions to cause us to rethink that instinct to defend LEO.

          No one wants criminals to go free. What folks want is LEO who follow their constitutional oaths, follow the law and don’t take shortcuts to gain a conviction. We want LEO to respect the constitutional rights of every Citizen and place the importance of those rights and their oaths above gaining convictions.

          What folks demand from LEO individually and from LE Agencies is accountability, transparency and a willingness to make corrections in policy. We do not wish to be told that in effect ‘we LEO will take care of enforcement, we LEO will do it how, when and where we like, your opinions about policy and procedures don’t matter, go sit down and shut up’.

          If ‘warfare is too important to leave to the Generals’ then certainly law enforcement is important to leave to the LEO.

          Barry in reply to Mac45. | September 23, 2020 at 10:52 pm

          Yes. Far more damage is done with these police raids than the criminal activity.

          There are exceptions. They should be well vetted, required to catch really bad people, and present danger to the officers/public if not handled in precisely this manner. Preserving evidence doesn’t qualify.

          tom_swift in reply to Mac45. | September 23, 2020 at 11:33 pm

          That seems simple to me.

          Everything seems simple to the people who don’t actually have to make it work.

          Milhouse in reply to Mac45. | September 23, 2020 at 11:38 pm

          Warrants are served on criminals or suspected criminals. These people do not obey the rules. That is why they are criminals. And, that is why we have police.

          You said it yourself: or suspected criminals. Many suspected criminals do obey the rules. And if the police don’t then they are criminals, worse than the ones they pursue.

          If the police think a tactical entry is required, let them go right ahead. But let them do so under the knowledge that the homeowner has the right to defend himself from such an entry. That will make them think several times about it and almost always they’ll decide that it’s not required after all.

          Milhouse in reply to Mac45. | September 23, 2020 at 11:44 pm

          LEO has to get a warrant. LEO then needs to simply knock on the door and when the occupant comes to the door show them the warrant and demand entry. That seems simple to me.

          If the occupant refuses entry then ‘take the door’. If the occupant doesn’t come to the door in a.reasonable amount of time then likewise ‘take the door’. That seems reasonable and simple.

          The occupant should also have the right to call his lawyer and have the search wait until she gets there and is able to ascertain that the warrant is valid; if she believes it is not valid the search should wait until she can call the judge who issued it and put her case to him. If we had rules like that and enforced them we might be able to consider getting rid of the exclusionary rule.

          The Friendly Grizzly in reply to Mac45. | September 24, 2020 at 8:03 am

          Hyperbole much?

          Mac45 in reply to Mac45. | September 24, 2020 at 11:44 am


          While it might be nice to live in a world where everyone plays by the rules, that is not the world in which we live. The Constitution demands that searches and seizures be “reasonable”. Unfortunately, it does not define that term. While most searches can be accomplished during daylight hours on weekdays, some can not. In order to eliminate the potential for the evidence and contraband, being searched for, to be destroyed, it may be reasonable to conduct the warrant service at night or on weekends. In the case of arrest warrants for violent or dangerous felons, surprise is essential, as it can be reasonably assumed that the wanted person will resist arrest, probably violently.


          You are familiar with the term probable cause. That is what is needed for a search warrant to be authorized. If the system works as intended, a LEO will establish probable cause that contraband is being stored or moved through a specific location and that there is a strong probability that contraband is currently present in that location. He has to practice strict due diligence and document his evidence to establish PC for the warrant. Then a jurist has to critically examine that evidence and determine if it meets the threshold for sufficient PC to authorize the warrant. Once issued, the serving team must make several critical tactical decisions on how to successfully serve the warrant in the safest manner possible. In the case of fencing operations, chop shops and most other property related crimes, simply showing up with a couple of uniforms and some detectives during business hours is sufficient, as the chances of destruction of evidence or violent resistance is relatively low. Narcotics cases are a different matter. Violence is much more prevalent in the work of drug dealing than in fencing. And, in the case of street level storage or point of sale locations, the amount of contraband is sufficiently small so as to be readily disposable. So, the location has to be secured swiftly and by surprise, to limit violent resistance and destruction of the evidence to be seized.

          Now, back to the case of presumption of innocence and probable cause of criminal activity. A person is presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. However, when sufficient probable cause exists that criminal activity is occurring in a specif location and/or that a person is engaged in criminal activity, restrictions on search and seizure and arrest are modified. A law abiding citizen may not like being subjected to a warranted search or detention, but that is the trade-off for living in a society. And, should the warranted action be done without a proper evidentiary basis, that citizen has recourse for redress in the courts. So, when acting under a lawful warrant, LEOs are not required to engage in negotiation, especially lengthy negotiation, to in order to serve the warrant. however, all citizens, both law abiding and criminal, are required to submit to the provisions of the lawfully authorized warrant.

          So, while a person may make a reasonable attempt to verify the identity of the person serving the warrant, prior to accepting service, waiting for your attorney to arrive is not reasonable.

          Most of the problems surrounding service of search warrants comes from LEOs and jurists being lazy. On occasion, a LEO will fail to verify both information on the location and the source of the evidence that criminal activity is taking place there. Warrnts are issued for the wrong address. The unsupported testimony of “informants” is used without corroboration. Sometimes, especially with POS drug warrants, the point of sale may have no connection to the crime other than being a convenient location for the drug pass. Jurists skim the affidavit for the warrant, maybe ask a couple of questions and then sign off, without actually conducting any true due diligence. And, finally, there is the method of execution of the warrant. Certain investigators and investigative units want to be tacticool. They race into the scene in plain clothes, without uniform back-up present. They refuse to make any attempt to show the resident of the location the warrant, even on low risk services. Then when there is unnecessary resistance, problems develop. There are problems with some warrant services. But, they are not as wide spread as people believe. Just like the fact that unarmed suspects are killed by police makes the news because it is so rare, the same is true for warrant service.

          CommoChief in reply to Mac45. | September 24, 2020 at 1:03 pm


          Thanks for the more thoughtful, less strident post this morning. Based on this post it seems to me that we agree.

          Tactical entry isn’t meant as the first option or the preferred option. Its use must be closely monitored and scrutinised, not applied indiscriminately.

          It is a necessary tool to be applied in specific situations where a less kinetic method is certain to fail. Obviously there are circumstances where a kinetic entry is fully justified. I and others have argued for retaining the tool but limiting its use to occasions where absolutely required.

        tom_swift in reply to CommoChief. | September 23, 2020 at 11:36 pm

        Does that include homeowners insisting upon peaceful, no tactical entry service of search warrants?

        It shouldn’t be too terribly difficult to distinguish between violent rioters and the police.

          CommoChief in reply to tom_swift. | September 24, 2020 at 2:27 am


          So you’re totes cool with being awakened to the sound of your door being breached with a considerable amount of yelling while you lay prostrate before the invaders who may or may not be LEO, who may or may not have a valid warrant?

          If you say so but I don’t think you have convinced me.

          Explain how you would do that at 1am Tom.

      CKYoung in reply to DaveGinOly. | September 23, 2020 at 9:24 pm

      Dave, trust in the “justice” system is eroding quickly, to the point I have little doubt there would be activist judges who override juries with judgements as a matter of law. Look at judge sullivan in the General Flynn’s case. Plus, we know the left loves to use the process as punishment. They don’t give a flying F what happens to the defendant in the end, as long as he or she has to spend inordinate amounts of money, time, energy and endure excruciating stress. I can really appreciate what you’re saying, we definitely need to circle the wagons, but we also need to restore the justice system to it’s intended purpose.

Remember when O.J. Simpson was acquitted and all the evil white people rioted?

Neither do I.

Hopefully cooler heads will prevail. It’s up to locals who truly are attempting to peacefully demonstrate to identify those who are hijacking it and committing violence, arson and anarchy.

Unfortunately I don’t have much faith that will happen in Louisville for the next several days. Tension and mistrust in the LPD are too high for immediate cooperation. Maybe by Monday the locals will start driving the imported anarchists out.

    notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to CommoChief. | September 23, 2020 at 8:49 pm

    Democrat Congress Critters are hijacking it.

    Linda Sarsour Incites People To ‘Rise Up’ In Louisville

    Sure sounds like incitement to riot and she’s there in Louisville on the ground.

    Linda Sarsour
    Justice has NOT been served.

    Rise UP. All across this country. Everywhere. Rise up for #BrehonnaTaylor

    Milhouse in reply to CommoChief. | September 23, 2020 at 11:49 pm

    I’m not sure there is anyone truly wanting only to demonstrate peacefully. It would be different if there were actual cause for decent people to want to demonstrate. If an injustice had been done then one can easily understand how decent peaceful people would want to protest against it, and would be upset at their protest being hijacked by thuggish hooligans and revolutionaries. But no injustice was done here, so why are the decent people not going about their business?

      CommoChief in reply to Milhouse. | September 24, 2020 at 2:17 am


      IMO the injustice is the death of MS Taylor. She was killed during the chain of events set in motion by the LPD decision to utilize a kinetic entry/breach of a residence.

      Lots of circumstances. Lots of blame to go around. Lots of Monday morning quaterbacking, me included. The fact remains that we will never know what would have occurred had the LPD decided to use less aggressive tactics.

      The tactics in question have been eliminated by ordinance in Louisville. Let’s all also remember that none of the items listed in the warrant were recovered at the residence. IMO that indicates a less aggressive less militarized approach by LPD might have avoided the death of MS Taylor. Perhaps.

      Instead we now have additional rioting. Additional damage to the community. Growing distrust in LE Agencies and two more LEO wounded in Louisville. More riots elsewhere. More division. More animosity. All this for the.sake of raiding the residence of some piss ant drug dealers ex girlfriend? IMO, It wasn’t worth it.

      These heavy handed tactics being used by overly aggressive agencies against low level threat profiles are not worth the damage being done, IMO.

      This case differs significantly from those.of Floyd or the the Atlanta shooting or Kenosha. I am willing to acknowledge that. That doesn’t mean mob violence/arson/anarchy is ever acceptable.

      It does mean that I believe we should judge these events on their own specific circumstances and not hesitate to call out what we see as an injustice or where a LE agency policy or procedure should be modified.

        Milhouse in reply to CommoChief. | September 24, 2020 at 11:09 am

        Ms Taylor’s death was sad, but not unjust. It should not have happened, and was the result of bad policies that have already been changed and should probably be changed more. The police acted by the book, but the book was wrong. I won’t quibble if you say that was a valid reason to protest.

        But that was then. Those protests, whether valid or not, happened months ago. What has happened now to occasion valid protests? No injustice has happened now. On the contrary, it seems to me that the grand jury got it exactly right, and justice has been done, so all decent people should be applauding, not protesting. Those protesting are saying they wanted innocent people to be punished and charged with crimes they did not commit. That is not a valid reason for protesting.

          CommoChief in reply to Milhouse. | September 24, 2020 at 1:18 pm


          I am ok with folks protesting what they see as an injustice even when they are drawing the wrong conclusions as many or most did/are doing in Louisville. Citizens do have the right to assemble and demand redress if done peacefully. That doesn’t mean the protesters are going to have their demands met, only that they be heard.

          Protest is always nonviolent. When folks begin shutting down roadways, engaging in violence or intimidation, arson and anarchy they are no longer protesting; they are a mob.

          Mobs have to be dispersed with the the least level of force required. If that’s a PA announcement and they comply great. If the level of force escalates beyond tear gas to batons or beyond that’s ok too.

I think that the local peaceful types fully support the thugs. They just publicly say that they don’t to distance themselves from the eventual retribution. If the thugs are using you for cover, and you remain there, then you have given them permission to use you as cover. We aren’t as stupid as you seem to think that we are.

FWIW, the difference between cover and concealment is that cover stops bullets. So if someone is using you as cover, guess what is stopping the bullets.

notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital | September 23, 2020 at 8:54 pm

They are striking early to seal another false narrative. The grand jury ruled that the police acted properly in self-defense so there was no murder. The police were serving a warrant and when no one answered their knock, decided to break down the door. Breana’s boyfriend (Walker) then shot and wounded one of the cops. Game on. The real controversy is that Walker was not charged with anything even though he was the one that created the situation that led to her death.

The other controversy is that the cop charged with 2nd degree endangerment didn’t hit anyone with his shots. Two of his shots penetrated a wall and could have hit someone not in the apartment. I think the DA was looking for anything to charge the cops and knew this wouldn’t stick. He should have just focused on walking the public through the jury findings.

    CommoChief in reply to Pasadena Phil. | September 23, 2020 at 11:07 pm


    Ok but what time was the warrant served, were the occupants asleep, did they actually hear and understand what was being shouted? How long did the occupants have to wake up, process the information, realize it was the LPD and move to open the door?

    I am putting myself in the position of the occupants. I would have a great deal of difficulty processing all that due to prescription medication for sleep. It is very likely that I would only react to the sound of my door being breached and my mastiffs barking.

    Now all this yelling and barking is going on, I am still not fully awake but adrenaline is charging me up. I grab a weapon to take position to repel the home invaders…..

    Likely I get shot by the LEO because I hear my dogs being shot and return fire. That is a very plausible scenario. Put yourself in the position of the occupants.

    Better yet put yourself in the position of the occupant of the ‘wrong address’. That happens. Sometimes the street or apartment numbers get transposed and the warrant is served on the wrong people.

    Better policies and procedural safeguards can significantly mitigate these tragic outcomes. Remember that no evidence being sought by the warrant was recovered from Taylor’s residence, so that seems to indicate that the overall Intel regarding Taylor was sub optimal.

    amatuerwrangler in reply to Pasadena Phil. | September 24, 2020 at 12:11 am

    Commo Chief has it right.
    I’m in CA, so the laws here may differ, but I doubt it. The time period between 10PM and 6AM, following, are considered to be “nighttime”. Any warrant service intended to occur during those hours must be endorsed for same by the issuing judge after evidence of the necessity is spelled out in the supporting documentation. (Exception- a person can be arrested during those hours if they are in a public place or in custody on other charges.) I do not know if Kentucky has similar regulation of service, but I have seen nothing related to special service conditions in any public reports.

    I did see the KY AG state that the warrant was NOT a no-knock warrant. (CA does not have those unless there is a recent change, which I doubt.) I don’t recall seeing any reliable reports as to the time of day that the police arrived to serve the warrant.

    This situation may qualify as a “wrong house” action. There is information out there that someone other that Walker was the object of the warrant and that warrants for other locations where the actual criminal was known to stay were being served simultaneous to this one. This might be clarified later. Walker (civilian shooter) stated afterwards that he thought the knocking, etc was Brionna’s ex-boyfriend. At least that confirms the claim that the cops did knock. In general, this also would not be the first time that actual criminal home invaders had claimed to be police when initiating their entry.

So rioting thugs determine which reporters can be on public streets and how they report the news? What in the world has this country become? I expect to get up in the morning and read that Democrats are threatening that if Harris … Biden isn’t elected, more cities will burn. I think the planned (U-Haul full of supplies) animalistic behavior will make people think twice about riot blackmail. Hope so.

Hey, I know, let’s go to the Highlands, one of the most liberal neighborhoods in Louisville, and trash the businesses there.

Isn’t this in large part the fault of the media who pushed lies about the facts in this incident? Why are they not held accountable for pushing lies which have caused a rise in racial issues stemming from these lies which were purposefully pushed for political reasons, and to keep the division growing?

Those who publicly call out for violence should be arrested and charged with inciting a riot and violence, and given the true nature of what the leaders of these organized “protests” aims are, which is insurrection against the government, ultimately they should be charged with Insurrection.

This is the same basic playbook the Obama regime pushed during the Arab Spring, which was by design meant to end in regime changes which Obama was pushing. They are trying to bring it here. They want civil war. They want to overthrow our current government, which AOC and her squad have continually been calling for. This is the “fundamental change” Obama was really talking about.

Democrats are nothing but Terrorists anymore.

I just saw a story on CNN stressing that the riots in Louisville are “mostly peaceful.” They also said that one of the officers was in surgery to remove a “mostly peaceful” bullet from him.

It’s starting to look to me like a case of taxation without representation.

The Mob is demanding a lynching. I’m actually quite impressed that the D.A. seems to have no intention of giving them one.

The photos also seem to show mobs which, while noisy, are far too small to actually accomplish anything revolutionary.

    CommoChief in reply to tom_swift. | September 24, 2020 at 2:46 am


    Well at least we agree on refusing to allow a mob to dictate our actions. Mobs can be pacified/placated to an extent before they form with ‘gold’ and by targeting their leadership, suppliers and organizers.

    Once a mob actually emerges there is nothing for it but to meet.the threat.head on with escalating levels of force until it is broken. Mobs making attempts to rule by force.or intimidation cannot be allowed or tolerated.

It’s a damn shame AG Barr retired, isn’t it?

Criminal anarchists want control and power, so they can control you, take your things, brutalize your family, and expect a thank you from you while they rape your mother and infant daughter.

they really are social justice advocates, out for a little fun, before the communist democrat order to murder all whites, and then light skin blackoids and then dark skin blackoids, and then you, lying about your degree of blackness, last minced and seasoned as sushi for the chinese.

Until a couple of months ago, AG Barr was living in the 1990s. Now he’s made it up to the year 2000. What a useless hack. He is the fauci of attorney generals.

Did they ever charge the boyfriend with anything?
Seems like he’s been left untouched. Was he ever charged with anything? attempted murder? or anything? the narrative is that he was scared for his life and fired into the door.

    It would appear the “narrative” is correct, so the charges were dropped.

    Walker was not wanted, was not the subject of the no knock search warrant, nor did he have any record.

    He was in possession of a permit for his handgun and fired for fear of his life when the door was broken down by the police.

Kamala Harris amid Protests: ‘Never Stop Speaking Breonna’s Name’

Fine Kamala, I agree. Let us speak BREONNA’s Name. BREONNA Had The Body Of A Murder Victim In Her Rental Car. BREONNA Was A Drug Dealer. BREONNA Was Killed After Police Knocked On Her Door And Were Let Into The Apartment Only To Be Ambushed By Gunfire From Breonna’s Drug Dealing Accomplice Jamarcus Glover. Good Idea Kamala, say her name and the criminal activity she was involved with so everyone knows the #%&@ she was and how you support these dregs of society.

    You have no idea what the fuck you are talking about. None.

    She was not a drug dealer nut did date Glover in 2016. The body found in the car was never attached to her in anyway other than she originally rented the car. Weird, I will agree. She maintained some contact with Glover but there is zero evidence she was a drug dealer or drug user.

    Glover was not present in the house and did not fire the shot at the police. That was her boyfriend Walker, a person who was not a subject of the search warrant, was not a drug dealer, has no prior arrests and holds a valid permit for the handgun.

    When police cave a door in in the middle of the night they just might meet some resistance from unsuspecting residents. They were not “Let Into The Apartment Only To Be Ambushed By Gunfire”. It is not clear how much time elapsed between when they knocked and announced their selves as police.

    The media has lied the entire time. Arm yourself with the facts before you start spewing the same fake nonsense.

      Paul In Sweden in reply to Barry. | September 25, 2020 at 12:43 am

      Go on with your #PeacefulProtests and #CNNisFakeNews Breonna narrative, there are still #GruberStupid people out there.

        Embarrassed yourself enough?

        Your “facts” are bullshit and incorrect.

        Mine are correct and have nothing to do with CNN or “peaceful protests”.

        You’re just like CNN, spreading false information and nit admitting you have it wrong. Start with Glover – WHO WASN”T THERE.