Sometimes entrenched moonbats type at their computers with such force the foam from their slobber fangs sticks to the keys – here is one such diatribe.

WASHINGTON POST – What happened in Ferguson, Mo., last month was a tragedy. What’s on course to happen there next month will be a farce.

NO, a farce would be the ridiculous City Council Meetings where the Ferguson dependent class stood up and railed about the cost of breaking the law being too expensive.   That was/is a farce.

October is when a grand jury is expected to decide whether to indict the white police officer, Darren Wilson, who killed an unarmed black teenager by firing at least six bullets into him. It’s a good bet the grand jurors won’t charge him, because all signs indicate that the St. Louis County prosecutor, Robert McCulloch, doesn’t want them to.

..”doesn’t want them to”?  Oh, it must mean the prosecutor is keeping something from the grand jury right?  Wrong,… read on.

The latest evidence that the fix is in came this week from The Post’s Kimberly Kindy and Carol Leonnig, who discovered that McCulloch’s office has declined so far to recommend any charges to the grand jury. Instead, McCulloch’s prosecutors handling the case are taking the highly unusual course of dumping all evidence on the jurors and leaving them to make sense of it.

GASP.  As evidence to prove the prosecutor doesn’t want the grand jury to indict – the Washington Post says they are getting “all evidence”.  Yikes, how dare he. 

Of course that means the converse argument would be accurate, right?  Meaning to insure charges the prosecutor must have to withhold evidence.?  You getting this logic…   

McCulloch’s office claims that this is a way to give more authority to the grand jurors, but it looks more like a way to avoid charging Wilson at all — and to use the grand jury as cover for the outrage that will ensue. It is often said that a grand jury will indict a ham sandwich if a prosecutor asks it to. But the opposite is also true. A grand jury is less likely to deliver an indictment — even a much deserved one — if a prosecutor doesn’t ask for it.

Who’s not asking for one?  The fact a Grand Jury is looking at evidence is indicative of a prosecutor looking to see if there is a factual basis for a charge.  But don’t let that little sniglet of fact sneak in there Dana.  Good grief.

One might give McCulloch the benefit of the doubt, if not for his background. His father was a police officer killed in a shootout with a black suspect, and several of his family members are, or were, police officers. His 23-year record on the job reveals scant interest in prosecuting such cases. During his tenure, there have been at least a dozen fatal shootings by police in his jurisdiction (the roughly 90 municipalities in the county other than St. Louis itself), and probably many more than that, but McCulloch’s office has not prosecuted a single police shooting in all those years. At least four times he presented evidence to a grand jury but — wouldn’t you know it? — didn’t get an indictment. (continue reading)

If you keep reading within the final paragraphs you’ll note the irony in his final paragraphs where he asserts: “I’m not in any position to determine Wilson’s guilt”… and who would be jackass?

Oh yeah, that would be the GRAND JURY you just spent 800 words to disparage.  You know, the one getting “all the evidence” to make a decision.

This, THIS is the mind of a moonbat liberal, who folds his arguments into pretzel shaped contortions only to end up back in the place where he began.