Judge Nelson still has not provided a ruling on whether conflicting “expert” testimony will be permitted in the trial.

But that’s not why you need to watch this video:

Please watch the video before continuing (this is important)

At 1:50 the strangest construct of trial explanation stems from the mouth of the Black reporter, Travell Eiland. This stuff is fascinating to me.   See if you can pick it up.

It is so subtle, and yet so ASTOUNDINGLY jaw dropping and LOUD in its capacity toward revelation – it really is stunning.   It begins at 1:50 and listen closely to exactly what he says – and yet he doesn’t even realize he’s saying it.

People often say reporter bias is constitutional, meaning they don’t notice themselves doing it.  The same is said about embedded racism.   But this is well beyond a bias.  This is an inherent ideological admission to something that strikes at the very heart of this case;  And this reporter, nor the producers who aired it, even noticed himself doing it.

U N R E A L !

Did you notice it? Did you notice it the first time? Or, did it pass by until it was pointed out?