posted
McKinney is up to her old tricks again... this is the 5th time she's punched a cop. McKinney is a known race-baiter, hate monger, bigot, unintelligent 'tard from my home state.
And I thought the Dems were all about respect and respecting human rights and human civil liberties... maybe she needs more Democratic indoctrination...
Here's the story:
A U.S. Capitol Police officer is considering filing assault charges against Rep. Cynthia McKinney (D-Ga.) following an altercation yesterday in which she allegedly hit him after he asked to see identification, according to a source familiar with the incident.
The incident occurred at approximately 8:50 yesterday morning at the New Jersey Avenue and C Street entrance to the Longworth Building. As McKinney was entering the building, the officer stopped her and asked for identification. McKinney allegedly hit him before identifying herself as a member of Congress and walking away, the source said.
McKinney’s office would not comment on the incident yesterday afternoon.
Sgt. Kimberly Schneider, spokeswoman for the Capitol Police, was unable to confirm the details of the account, saying, “The matter has been brought to our attention and is currently under investigation.”
Members of the House do not typically display their congressional ID cards around the Capitol complex, as staff do, but many wear the official lapel pin for the 109th Congress. It was not known whether McKinney was displaying the pin yesterday.
With or without the pin, many Congress members pass through security with merely a nod or hello to security officers. They are not required to pass through metal detectors.
Capitol Hill publication Hotline reported a witness’s account on its ****. According to the ****, the witness recounted that the officer pursued McKinney after she failed to pass through the metal detector. As the officer took McKinney by the arm, she swung around and punched him in the chest while still holding on to her cell phone.
The incident is likely to have been caught on videotape, since all Capitol Hill entrances are monitored by cameras.
-------------------- Do not boast about tomorrow, for you do not know what a day may bring forth -- Proverbs 27:1 Posts: 476 | From: East Texas | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well at least she didn't shoot him in the face with a shotgun
-------------------- It is impossible to make anything foolproof because fools are so ingenious. Posts: 3311 | From: St. Louis | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Obviously "the man" isn't keeping her down. If what the article says is true, then I kind of figure the cop got what he had coming. I'm sure he knew exactly who she was.
-------------------- If it wasn't for bad luck I'd have no luck at all. Posts: 1529 | From: Tacoma WA | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The cop didn't know her... she tried to enter through an area she never goes to, she changed up her hair style, and she refuses to wear her security I.D.
She tried to by-pass the metal detector and that's when the trouble started, and kept walking after the cop repeatedly asked her to come back. She's her own worst enemy.
You really think the cop would waste his time hasseling her for no reason? He was doing his job.
-------------------- Do not boast about tomorrow, for you do not know what a day may bring forth -- Proverbs 27:1 Posts: 476 | From: East Texas | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The reports before "editing" by the cops were that the cop grabbed her from behind and she reflexively swung and hit him as she was spun around.
Were you a woman suddenly grabbed from behind when you know you are doing what you are supposed to be doing, it might be a good idea to swing first and ask questions later.
The fact is, no Capital cop has reason or the right to grab or question a Congress person doing exactly as Congress persons are supposed to do, a Capital cop has no right to not know who a Congress person is (since that's the nature of the job!), and this particular one deserves to be canned.....FAST!
Posts: 11304 | From: Fort Worth, Texas | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The following quoted statement conflicts with ALL the available evidence of the incident and clearly is motivated by political interest:
"She tried to by-pass the metal detector and that's when the trouble started, and kept walking after the cop repeatedly asked her to come back. She's her own worst enemy."
ALL Congress persons "by-pass the metal detector". It is their right.
There are witnesses that contradict any claim that the cop "asked" her anything or spoke at all.
Perhaps her "worst enemy" is busy making such statements?
Posts: 11304 | From: Fort Worth, Texas | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
You're right, Congress can bypass the metal detector WHEN they are WEARING their security I.D. McKinney wasn't wearing hers. That gave the cop reasonable cause to stop and question her and it even gives him the authority to physically stop her.
This cop did no wrong and the tape will prove that. Even if he was just giving her a hard time, she had no place in punching him or slapping him.
McKinney knows she messed and she knows it's all on tape, hence her apology statement that was released today...
-------------------- Do not boast about tomorrow, for you do not know what a day may bring forth -- Proverbs 27:1 Posts: 476 | From: East Texas | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
The rule is that the Congress person DOES NOT have to wear or display ANY form of ID to bypass those checkpoints.
Are you suggesting that in this time of terrorism that the Congress chose to require Congressmen to wear conspicuous decorations identifying themselves as targets for assassins from Al Qaeda? How idiotic would that be, even if it would benifit your biased argument and views of the incident? Show me that rule and the idiotic Congress person that brought such a bill before Congress. Were all the other members absent when he got such a dumba$$ rule into effect and that is the way he got it passed?
The cop chose to ignore his obligation to know who is and who is not a Congress person and chose to ignore the Congress person's right to bypass the checkpoint, not to mention her right to not be physically attacked for observing her right. The cop had an obligation to NOT impose upon a member of Congress and had NO "cause to stop and question her". However, I can certainly see that a woman, Congress person or not, has "cause" to suspect that someone grabbing her is up to no good and has "cause" to react in defense. Claiming a cop has "cause" to act in a manner that directly contradicts the intended finction of his job is b-ll s--t! And saying otherwise is political bias and trash talk of the kind generated by the RNC!
His job ONLY exist to protect the Congress persons and that requires that he first know who they are so he doesn't "create or invent", intentionally or otherwise, some imagined "cause" to interfere with them and, thereby, the course of business of the Republic.
He needs to be canned and all those blaming her need to admit they are nothing more than koolade drinkers.
Posts: 11304 | From: Fort Worth, Texas | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
OK, following your line or reasoning, let me ask you this:
For what purpose and for what reason are congresspersons issued their special security I.D. tags? Why are they issued and expected to wear these tags? What is their purpose?
Tell me what purpose they are if they are not intended to be used for things like bypassing metal detectors?
-------------------- Do not boast about tomorrow, for you do not know what a day may bring forth -- Proverbs 27:1 Posts: 476 | From: East Texas | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
You probably won't answer this question, but how can you or anyone else justify her violent outburst and violent behaviour?
Even if McKinney is 100% in the right, how can her actions be just fine and OK?
Again, more double-standards from the Dems (the party of peace and non-violence).
-------------------- Do not boast about tomorrow, for you do not know what a day may bring forth -- Proverbs 27:1 Posts: 476 | From: East Texas | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Team Sleep: OK, following your line or reasoning, let me ask you this:
For what purpose and for what reason are congresspersons issued their special security I.D. tags? Why are they issued and expected to wear these tags? What is their purpose?
Tell me what purpose they are if they are not intended to be used for things like bypassing metal detectors?
So the lobbyists know who to make the checks out to?
-------------------- It is impossible to make anything foolproof because fools are so ingenious. Posts: 3311 | From: St. Louis | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Team Sleep: OK, following your line or reasoning, let me ask you this:
For what purpose and for what reason are congresspersons issued their special security I.D. tags? Why are they issued and expected to wear these tags? What is their purpose?
Tell me what purpose they are if they are not intended to be used for things like bypassing metal detectors?
In case you didn't know, which you certainly should, before fostering this bigoted B-ll sh-t you are presenting as reasonable, Congress persons are, via the Constitution itself, immune from arrest......
"...a member of Congress "shall in all cases, except treason, felony and breach of the peace, be privileged from arrest" both while attending a session and traveling...."
Note that that is Constitutional and even Congress, short of actually ammending the Constitution (which Congress hasn't the power to do), cannot dispose of that law.
Whether or not they are issued their special security I.D. tags", as you put it. They are NOT required to even have them, let alone wear them.
I can't tell you what their purposes is, since they aren't required and cannot be made so without a Constitutional ammendment.
But I can tell you what the purpose of your post that begins by declaring the Congresswoman was a Democrat and leaving out most of the facts, then characterized a womans defense of her person by saying she "punched" the policeman, leaving out the fact that she did so in response to an attack, so as to disparage both the Congress woman and the Democratic Party. Yours was a biased and purtely partisan political character attack.
Now, had you taken the opposition political approach and titled your insinuations such as. "A Capital cop who is a Republican sympathizer manhandles a Congresswoman", you probqbly would want to believe I would approave. No way. I'd have asked what the h-ll his political affiliation had to do with the situation and why you imagine the cop was acting as a Republican and then suggested you may have over stated the case by choosing the descriptive word "manhandles" (or should it, in this case, have been "womanhandles").
[ March 30, 2006, 20:15: Message edited by: bdgee ]
Posts: 11304 | From: Fort Worth, Texas | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Team Sleep: You probably won't answer this question, but how can you or anyone else justify her violent outburst and violent behaviour?
Even if McKinney is 100% in the right, how can her actions be just fine and OK?
Again, more double-standards from the Dems (the party of peace and non-violence).
Where do you get off describing the incident of a woman defending herself as a "violent outburst and violent behaviour" when you have already demonstrated via misrepresentations that you have no facts to justify your insinuations.
She did not attack him, he attacked her. He is by Constitutional requirement not allowed to resrtrain or arrest her. It is his responsibility, as an official representative of the Capital Police, expected to at least have a passing familiarity with the boundaries of the laws he is there to enforce, including those that declare he can not restrain a member of Congress.
How, pray tell, do you get off defending an attempted open voilation of the Constitution and a perpetrator of that violation?
Posts: 11304 | From: Fort Worth, Texas | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
Let me point out though, it repeatedly refers to her as an ex congress member, the date on the article is June 18, 2003. Since that time, Cynthia McKinney, was re-elected to Congress.
I may have only recently heard of Cynthia McKinney myself, but after reading that article, I want to hear more of her and of her ideas.
Posts: 11304 | From: Fort Worth, Texas | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
Months before the 2000 presidential elections, the offices of Florida Governor Jeb Bush and Secretary of State Katherine Harris ordered the removal of 90,000 citizens from the voter rolls because they were convicted felons . . . and felons can’t vote in Florida. There was one problem: 97 percent of those on the list were, in fact, innocent.
They weren’t felons, but they were guilty . . . of not being white. Over half the list contained names of non-whites. I’m not guessing: I have the list from out of the computers of Katherine Harris’ office -- and the “scrubbed” voter’s race is listed with each name.
And that’s how our President was elected: by illegally removing tens of thousands of legal African American voters before the race.
-------------------- jordan Posts: 5812 | From: st paul,mn | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
the facts seem to be verified from numerous sources...
the "funny" part? everybody complains about the recount issue and ignores the real issue: voter disenfranchisement...
i think Rove did an awesome job of diverting the attention...
on the other hand? the Dems may not have complained too much about FLA because there are so many illegals registered to vote elsewhere...
why else would Bush be so worried about getting their vote?
the sad truth in America today is that we probbaly could not stand up to international scrutiny in our very own voting system, and the electronic system will in fact make it IMPOSSIBLE to verify anything... i have no idea where all this is headed, but i don't like it..
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Where and when did I say McKinney should be arrested? I didn't. I know what the constitution says.
McKinney herself said that out of the 435 congress men and women on capitol hill, only 7 others don't wear their issued security I.D. And guess who started wearing her I.D. tag yesterday?????
I think it's pretty funny that there isn't even a bit of furor over the fact that she refuses to face the media, and Pelosi is saying "It's no big deal..."
If this were A GOP, there would be an uproar about not facing the media and the Dems would be all over this situation.
The bottom line is, her actions are completely unjustitifed... even if the cop was harrasing her because she was black, as her first press release states, she should conduct herself in a professional manner, rise above it, and be the bigger person.
And after McKinney blamed her 2002 congressional loss (to another black woman) on the Jews, I lost all respect for her. What kind of insane and ridiculous thinking is that? She lost to a Republican black woman and she blames Jews for her loss? Her credibility is shot.
-------------------- Do not boast about tomorrow, for you do not know what a day may bring forth -- Proverbs 27:1 Posts: 476 | From: East Texas | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Do you not think at all? Or do you simply hate and regurgitate the Party line, which is what appears to be the case.
What you advocate is that a Capital Cop be allowed to grab and hold a mamber of Congress.
If a cop detains you, that is an arrest. Check it out.......follow back the roots and origines of the word....a-rest, i.e, to stop from moving. And note that the Framers of the Constitution considered exactly that possibility. The provision that they inserted into the Constitution to free members of Congress from such detention is to stop any and all interference with a member of Comgress being able to perform his functions for the Nation. It makes no allowances for either your or my political preferences....it shouldn't.
Also, it is clear that you didn't bother to read the link Glass.... provided, that dispels all that trash talk about the Congresswoman you are spewing.
Now let's look at your "jive-talk" insult ("Congressho") to a mamber of Congress. Do you have to engage in that nonsense? Vulgarity properly means something entirely inappropriate and calling a respected member of Congress a "ho" is that and more.
Posts: 11304 | From: Fort Worth, Texas | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
And what partyline am I regurgitating? I'm not a Dem or a member of the GOP. You can desist with that lame, tired, played-out response...
McKinney said that 9/11 was a fabrication of the Bush administration. Now she has backed away from her unfounded comments...
Her friends are fellow hate-mongers like Louis Farrakhan and Zimbabwean dictator Robert Mugabe. And lets take a look at her donor list which include upstanding folks like Abdurahman Alamoudi, the former executive director of the American Muslim Council, and former college professor Sami Al-Arian. Both have links to terror groups.
Who can forget the riveting letter she wrote to Saudi prince Alwaleed bin Talal where she blasted Rudy Giuliani for returning Saudi's $10 million "I'm sorry" check after 9/11. She urged the prince to give the money to poor blacks who were neglected by Washington D.C.
What a class act she is...
Surprise, surprise... McKinney is now making this a racial issue. Gee, couldn't see that one coming...
Again bdgee, you won't even speak to the double-standard... if this was a GOP, the media would be screaming for an interview (just like they did with Cheney) and the Dems would be calling for an arrest. You know it! Admit it!
-------------------- Do not boast about tomorrow, for you do not know what a day may bring forth -- Proverbs 27:1 Posts: 476 | From: East Texas | Registered: Dec 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
i have to say i don't like her positions, but i do suspect that this is being blown way out of proportion.
the surveillance vidoes are "inconclusive"... that would lead me to believe she didn't "assualt" the cop...
and she shoulda been wearing her ID pin out of respect for the security people... on the other hand? she's been on the "hill" for ten or twelve years, the cops should know who she is by now since she has such a loud mouth...
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise. Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Team Sleep: And what partyline am I regurgitating? I'm not a Dem or a member of the GOP. You can desist with that lame, tired, played-out response...
McKinney said that 9/11 was a fabrication of the Bush administration. Now she has backed away from her unfounded comments...
Her friends are fellow hate-mongers like Louis Farrakhan and Zimbabwean dictator Robert Mugabe. And lets take a look at her donor list which include upstanding folks like Abdurahman Alamoudi, the former executive director of the American Muslim Council, and former college professor Sami Al-Arian. Both have links to terror groups.
Who can forget the riveting letter she wrote to Saudi prince Alwaleed bin Talal where she blasted Rudy Giuliani for returning Saudi's $10 million "I'm sorry" check after 9/11. She urged the prince to give the money to poor blacks who were neglected by Washington D.C.
What a class act she is...
Surprise, surprise... McKinney is now making this a racial issue. Gee, couldn't see that one coming...
Again bdgee, you won't even speak to the double-standard... if this was a GOP, the media would be screaming for an interview (just like they did with Cheney) and the Dems would be calling for an arrest. You know it! Admit it!
You keep repeating those lies about the woman!
My god, stop quoting the RNC newsletter.
Posts: 11304 | From: Fort Worth, Texas | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
No offense to Glass (whom I think is an upstanding moderate) but could anyone come up with an article written by a more leftwing flaming liberal than Greg Palast??? I mean, c'mon, people.
I was just in Washington D.C. last week. The helicopters fly overhead all day, every day. You can't go into the Library of Congress unless you register for a "reading card". I wanted to get a cup of coffee in a Starbucks located in the hospital. I had to show my driver's license. All this bickering about whether people (and yes, even the high and mighty icons of Congress) have to wear identification according to the Constitution is moot. Everything changed after 9/11. And if you think it didn't, go visit the Capitol.
Posts: 120 | From: New York | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
i am all for taking all the politicians "down a peg" at this point.. they have been taking too much special interest money...
what i thought was interesting about the article was the "he said that she said" stuff...
been seeing a lot of that...
somebody says somebody said something that they DIDN'T say.....
just recently? i was informed by a neighbor freind that Clinton pardoned murderes on his way out...
i just had to look, and of course i couldn't find a murderer he pardoned, just a bunch of cocaine dealers and bank/savings/loan crooks.... LOL... those are pretty bad, but not murderers...
interestingly? Clinton's pardon list is the only COMPLETE one i could find....
another really good example is Sadam and his connection to 911... Bush recently stated clearly that he was always careful NOT to say Sadam was involved, and yet 70% of people polled during the '04 campaign believed he did say Sadam was involved....
i knew Bush never said it, but was informed over and over and over again that i was incorrect... Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by ladybird: No offense to Glass (whom I think is an upstanding moderate) but could anyone come up with an article written by a more leftwing flaming liberal than Greg Palast??? I mean, c'mon, people.
I was just in Washington D.C. last week. The helicopters fly overhead all day, every day. You can't go into the Library of Congress unless you register for a "reading card". I wanted to get a cup of coffee in a Starbucks located in the hospital. I had to show my driver's license. All this bickering about whether people (and yes, even the high and mighty icons of Congress) have to wear identification according to the Constitution is moot. Everything changed after 9/11. And if you think it didn't, go visit the Capitol.
Leftwing? Isn't that your word for not slanted to the far far right?
The Constitution DID NOT change, no matter how much you may want to install the Religious Right as a dictatorial moral police.
Posts: 11304 | From: Fort Worth, Texas | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by ladybird: Oh for Pete's sake, bdgee, take a lesson from Glass. Chill.
"Chill out", you say? Don't you really mean succumb....capitulate......submit?
And accept your vision of the United States without the protections of the Constitution? No, I will not accept the destruction of my Country!
You need to accept the fact that this is not the United States of the RNC.
"Everything changed after 9/11.", is an excuse to justify whatever the Administration wants to shove down our throats and is a line parallel to those by the same spinners and honorable koolade servers that brought us other such wise pronouncements as Saddam has stockpiles of atomic bombs and poison gas and biological weapons already loaded onto rockets he has made that are capable of reaching the United States and anyone the President wants to declare an "enemy combatant" has no Constitutional rights and Saddam is working with Ben Laden and made 9/11 happen and on and on and on........
All of that was nothing but lies and propaganda to scare the population into granting power to a prevaricating president and his hand picked collection haters of normal American values. He wants dictatorial power and you want to allow it.
NO!
The Constitution has not changed, in spite of horrific effort by the Administration and the RNC.
Until you learn that the Constitution is what this country is and is all about and stop advocating ignoring or altering it by Presidential order or judicial manipulation, you are, absolutely, nothing more than an enemy of the United States.
Posts: 11304 | From: Fort Worth, Texas | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Chill out", you say? Don't you really mean succumb....capitulate......submit?
bdgee, you can't be suggesting that i've submitted?
the pendulum swings both ways...
everybody ran from Clinton and now they are gonna run from Bush...
is Delay from Bush' own district? Bush flew down there last month for the primary, (instead of casting an absentee ballot) ostensibly to show his unvoiced support for Delay....
people are beginning to realise that the war on terror will never be over and are waking up to the fact that we can't give up all of our rights to fight it... we've lost very little so far, and i think the lines have been drawn...
the Dems really do seem to be in total disarray, and they have only themselves to blame for losing so much ground in the last elections....
i really want to see the House go Dem and the Senate stay GOP.... i don't like it when one party controls all three....
it takes time, and yes, soemone does need to keep "cracking the whip" so that people don't become complacent....
as the corruption story unfolds? i suspect we'll see more polticos from BOTH parties go down...
i just hope they get everybody that has it coming to them... there's been to much big business welfare under this crew....
big business welfare is not good for capitalism any more than individual welfare is... in fact? i think it's worse....
Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hey bdgee. I am a staunch believer in the Constitution. In fact, I teach it to 6th graders. I don't want anybody to change it. When I said everything has changed, I meant security, not the Constitution. Wow, you fly off the handle because I use the term "left-wing liberal." Then you assume you know all my beliefs and blast me with your rhetoric. Well, there are extremes to every spectrum and just as there are left-wing loons, there are right-wing wackos. Most people fall somewhere in the middle. Now, relax and take a deep breath. I think the country will somehow manage to get along without your emotional rants.
Posts: 120 | From: New York | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
