According to the deposition of a former Hennepin County prosecutor, the county’s medical examiner told her in a phone call that there “were no medical indications of asphyxia or strangulation.”

One would think that would be the basis for corrective headlines around the civilized world where marches, street protests and traffic disruption, looting and burning of public and private properties, and the psychotic defunding the police was a direct result.

Don’t hold your breath.

But the money line comes as a result of a sex discrimination and retaliation lawsuit filed by former prosecutor Amy Sweasy. In her deposition, she quoted the medical examiner in the Floyd case….

What happens when the actual evidence doesn’t match up with the public narrative that everyone’s already decided on? This is the kind of case that ends careers.
— Hennepin County Medical Examiner Dr. Andrew Baker

And Baker has every reason to protect HIS career.

Hennepin County’s medical examiner, Dr. Andrew Baker, has an annual salary of more than $231,000, making him the state’s top paid county employee.
— Twin Cities Pioneer Press

Wouldn’t want the truth to endanger his mortgage payments. Now, multiply that by all of the officials possibly impacted by any controversial topic.

If you think about it, how many times have we been told we must believe something despite things we’ve seen with our own eyes that doesn’t make sense and goes against everything we’re told we must believe?

One thing that comes to mind is the result of the 2020 presidential election where we are still repeated told we must believe there was “no evidence” of vote fraud.

NY Times: Officials in Every State: No Evidence of Voter Fraud
ABC News: No evidence of widespread fraud: Experts
Wall Street Journal: No Evidence of Systematic Fraud in U.S. Elections
The Independent: No evidence of fraud in ‘most secure’ US election in history
Daily Mail: Bret Baier Tells Trump, ‘No Evidence’ of 2020 Election Fraud

There were numerous instances that reeked of funny business on election day, night, and in the days and weeks to follow. Citizens made presentations under oath with local technical experts at legislative hearings, showing glaring anomalies to the process. Suits were filed in courts nationwide and almost all were dismissed. THAT was the basis for the media to uniformly declare that the 2020 election was devoid of fraud and anyone with an inkling of doubt was a conspiracy theorist, election denying sociopath.

And why would that be?

Because regurgitating the lie is safe, especially when generous personal incomes are involved.

What happens when the actual evidence doesn’t match up with the public narrative that everyone’s already decided on? This is the kind of case that ends careers.

As previously surmised, this could explain why local and state judges declined to take or quickly dismissed cases questioning the results of the 2020 election.

It’s not because the case may or may not have had merit. It could have been because the judge simply didn’t need the hassle. He or she didn’t need unruly and unstable mobs with bullhorns staking out their homes in quiet neighborhoods. He or she didn’t need to weather calls for their firing and demands for contentious interviews with ignorant media types with their narrow minds already made up. Who needs that shit even though the job requires that all sides receive a fair hearing?

The path of least resistance is to accept the lie as truth no matter how many are harmed. Whether we’re talking about a presidential candidate or city where a reduction of law enforcement results in crime run amok and citizens become victims, as long as certain people can go on with their careers with the minimal amount of inconvenience, the truth be damned.

Our job is to control what people think.
— Mika Brzezinski, 2/22/17

So, whether we’re talking about COVID 19, UFOs, racism, Trump, or almost any narrative we’re told we must accept, remember the unrestrained declaration from one of our nation’s brightest journalistic minds and understand these arrogant people are not about the accurate dissemination of information to the public.

What happens when the actual evidence doesn’t match up with the public narrative that everyone’s already decided on? This is the kind of case that ends careers.

It’s all about making sure that information is friendly to their preferred political party, opulent paychecks and pensions continue undisturbed, and the mob is kept from showing up on their manicured front lawns.