Current Events > Trump defends officer Rolfe, who shot Brooks in the back at a Wendy's.

(+) Yeah! (+)

Donald Trump has defended the police officer who shot dead Rayshard Brooks in Atlanta, as a number of officers called in sick after their colleague was charged with murder.

Garrett Rolfe, a white officer, shot Brooks, who is black, twice in the back as Brooks pointed a police Taser stun gun in his direction while running away. Rolfe faces 11 charges over the killing.

Trump appeared on Fox News, where he defended Rolfe and appeared to criticize Brooks.

You cant resist a police officer, and if you have a disagreement, you have to take it up after the fact, Trump told Fox News host Sean Hannity. It was out of control the whole situation was out of control.

Trump said police had been treated unfairly in the US.

He said: Its up to justice right now. Its going to be up to justice. I hope he [Rolfe] gets a fair shake, because police have not been treated fairly in our country. But again, you cant resist a police officer like that.

Read more here:
theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jun/18/
rayshard-brooks-garrett-rolfe-trump-atlanta-police

---

Yeah, that'll get black people to vote for you. Fucking idiot.

---

"Let's side with the drunk driving pos that resisted arrest"

---

They shouldn't have shot him in the back but he didn't exactly help the situation in any way.

Trump is a racist piece of shit just like all the cop defenders here

because police have not been treated fairly in our country.

---

mustachedmystic posted...

Yeah, that'll get black people to vote for you. Fucking idiot.

There are more white supremacists than black people in the US. I think he's fine.

---

*puts on fox news for da bwabies*

there!!! nice & & safe

---

i pray trump acquits the officer.

---

=)

---

myzz7 posted...

i pray trump acquits the officer.

He can't, he can only pardon him if found guilty.

---

Accrovideogames posted...

There are more white supremacists than black people in the US. I think he's fine.

They all voted for him in 2016, and he lost the popular vote. If the liberals don't stay home on election day, he is screwed.

---

Accrovideogames posted...

He can't, he can only pardon him if found guilty.

Does Trump know this though?

---

Accrovideogames posted...

He can't, he can only pardon him if found guilty.

that then. a vote for trump this year is a vote for sanity and law & order.

---

1) How can you take it up after the fact if you are dead?
2) How are police not treated fairly?

Of course he does. His commitment to police reform is bull shit and lip service. The excuse will be he resisted and therefore was killed, but resisting isnt a murder sentence. The next excuse will be he had the taser and could have taken the gun next, pure speculation that means nothing. Given how trigger happy cops are I dont blame a civilian for fearing for their life.

so were supposed to be completely calm and not be scared, but cops can be irrational and act on impulse and emotion? Fuck that.

---

Accrovideogames posted...

He can't, he can only pardon him if found guilty.

If it's a federal crime. I'm not sure how this "felony murder" and other charges are classified as.

---

Ruvan22 posted...

1) How can you take it up after the fact if you are dead?

In 99.9%+ of all cases, you don't end up dead if you cooperate. Then you can go to court over it.

---

Rayshard Brooks resisted arrest, pried a taser (deadly weapon under Georgia law) out of a cop's hands, ran off, and fired it upon the officer chasing him.

If you think the cop wasn't justified in opening fire, you're saying that criminals should be able to grab an officer's weapon without any consequence..that cops have no right to discharge their firearm.

---

Gobstoppers12 posted...

In 99.9%+ of all cases, you don't end up dead if you cooperate. Then you can go to court over it.

Oh yea. The same justice system thats been favoring cops since the beginning of time. Criminal justice reform needs to be next on the list.

---

Skiggie posted...

Rayshard Brooks resisted arrest, pried a taser (deadly weapon under Georgia law) out of a cop's hands, ran off, and fired it upon the officer chasing him.

If you think the cop wasn't justified in opening fire, you're saying that criminals should be able to grab an officer's weapon without any consequence..that cops have no right to discharge their firearm.

Are you implying that the taser put the cops life at immediate risk?

---

Gobstoppers12 posted...

In 99.9%+ of all cases, you don't end up dead if you cooperate. Then you can go to court over it.

But (Vipa said), most courts will defer to police narratives. And when you ARE killed, what happens?

IdiotMachine posted...

You cant resist a police officer, and if you have a disagreement, you have to take it up after the fact, Trump told his potential arresting officer. "So we're after the fact now right?... We can take it up now?... For let's say... Umm... I mean... Okay who am I making this out to and for how much? I paused several times. I was waiting for you to jump in there..."

when it comes to donald, it's usually something like this actually...


---

TheVipaGTS posted...

Are you implying that the taser put the cops life at immediate risk?

While a taser is a non-lethal weapon, I feel for the cop, because it all happened so fast. If Rolfe had the time to think it out logically, I don't think he would have shot Brooks in the back, but would have rather continued pursuit or let him go and go arrest him later (as they have all his info). It's just that all of this (struggle, Brooks overpowering both of them, Brooks reaching and taking the taser off the cop, running away, and pointing "a weapon" at the cop) happened in literally less than 10 seconds. I also don't think it was right that Brooks was shot in the back. This is just a shitty scenario for all of those involved.

---

Pointing the taser back and firing as he ran, hes done that before. Fleeing in fear you would just clutch the taser white knuckle and run without looking back. Someone who has fired a gun at, say, a shopkeeper from whom they just robbed, retains the instinct to shoot those chasing you.

The guy most likely thought it was the cops gun. What a scumbag criminal, could have just complied.
---

I'm not sure what he should be charged with and I'm glad I dont have to make that decision.
I actually care a lot less about punishing him as individual as I do getting shit changed. Stop scaring the shit out of law enforcement trainees with all these videos of cops getting murdered. Stop breeding this culture of fear and paranoia that officers apparently have going on. That'll fix a lot of this.

---

IdiotMachine posted...

While a taser is a non-lethal weapon, I feel for the cop, because it all happened so fast. If Rolfe had the time to think it out logically, I don't think he would have shot Brooks in the back, but would have rather continued pursuit or let him go and go arrest him later (as they have all his info). It's just that all of this (struggle, Brooks overpowering both of them, Brooks reaching and taking the taser off the cop, running away, and pointing "a weapon" at the cop) happened in literally less than 10 seconds. I also don't think it was right that Brooks was shot in the back. This is just a shitty scenario for all of those involved.

Thats the thing though, he was shot in the back. It wasnt because the cops life was in direct danger. Its because theyre trained to immediately neutralize. We give the cop leeway for not thinking logically in a stressful situation, but not the civilian, especially an impaired one? No one is arguing that what the suspect did was right. The argument is it did not warrant being shot in the back. The cop did not need to discharge his weapon there. Period.

---

TheVipaGTS posted...

We give the cop leeway for not thinking logically in a stressful situation, but not the civilian, especially an impaired one?

We don't give leeway to people who are committing crimes. That officer was a law biding citizen performing his duty and it was discovered this man broke the law and needed to go to jail. He resisted, fought and punched officers all before stealing a taser and shooting it.

Police have a right to use their weapons against people they deem a threat. This man was a threat to himself and others after doing what he did. What kind of person does that to police? Think critically how brazen this man is.

---

Trump could lose some of his minority supporters if he keeps this up.
---

PickleRick2018 posted...

Trump could lose some of his minority supporters if he keeps this up.

What minority supporters?

---

Accrovideogames posted...

PickleRick2018 posted...

Trump could lose some of his minority supporters if he keeps this up.

What minority supporters?

I'm one of them.
---

IdiotMachine posted...

police have not been treated fairly in our country

when hes right hes right, I gotta give him that

---

PickleRick2018 posted...

I'm one of them.

So you support Trump?

---

Wow votes are dead even.

---

CADE FOSTER posted...

Trump is a racist piece of shit just like all the cop defenders here

"Everyone who doesn't unequivocally agree with me is a fucking racist!"

Dude, shut up. You sound rediculous

---

The cops will be acquitted, as they should be. Deal with it.

---

AlmightyCheeks posted...

"Let's side with the drunk driving pos that resisted arrest"

This is a dumb take

---

Irony posted...

This is a dumb take

na

---

52/48 now.

---

IdiotMachine posted...

because police have not been treated fairly in our country

Well this is true

It certainly is unfair that they are not held to any standards or accountability.

They can shoot people in the back twice, throw tear gas at innocent people, hurl old men to the ground and have the president come out on national TV and defend them
---

Poll is misleading a bit, he aimed and fired.

---

how people who voted yes want cops to do their jobs: https://youtu.be/DGIpAweGQGQ

shamelessly stolen from facebook but whatever

---

Frogles posted...

how people who voted yes want cops to do their jobs: https://youtu.be/DGIpAweGQGQ

shamelessly stolen from facebook but whatever

So either you shoot people in the back twice or you don't do anything at all?

What nonsense is this
---

UnfairRepresent posted...

So either you shoot people in the back twice or you don't do anything at all?

What nonsense is this

well if people like you have it your way the only option is to just do nothing as you get punched and then shot at with a taser just stolen from you

it's also a funny video

---

AlmightyCheeks posted...

"Let's side with the drunk driving pos that resisted arrest"

He can be a pos and it can still be an unjustified shoot. Doesn't need to be one or the other.


---

Frogles posted...

well if people like you have it your way the only option is to just do nothing as you get punched and then shot at with a taser just stolen from you

Nobody is saying "Do nothing" theyre saying "Don't shoot a man in the back twice when he is fleeing"

You are so utterly totally dishonest
---

UnfairRepresent posted...

Nobody is saying "Do nothing" theyre saying "Don't shoot a man in the back twice when he is fleeing"

You are so utterly totally dishonest

i think its dishonest to just say he was fleeing rather than fleeing and shooting them with a taser

---

Accrovideogames posted...

There are more white supremacists than black people in the US. I think he's fine.

God, people actually think things like this. You need to get out more. Youre getting clowned into aiming at the wrong target.

---

Frogles posted...

i think its dishonest to just say he was fleeing rather than fleeing and shooting them with a taser

1. Even if he had a taser you still don't shoot him twice in the back while fleeing

2. The taser was useless and the cop who shot him in twice in the back while he was fleeing knew it.

So no. It's not dishonest at all

You meanwhile are just being dishonest again.
---

2 grown men trained to subdue criminals, cant subdue 1 very drunk person. They then go on to lose their cool because of their incompetence and shoot a man in the back instead of letting him go(understanding that they have his car and know where he lives. Im probably giving them too much credit to think that far though) Sounds like those people shouldnt have been police officers, sounds like they shouldve been clowns instead.

FFS this isnt the Andy Griffith show, you cant be that bad at your job as a police officer and expect sympathy from people.