If Cynthia McKinney is a Congressmember, she deserves respect

[omega minimo]

Respect for the facts and the truth of what happened
Respect from pundits free from racist, sexist comments on her appearance
Respect from Capitol staff who are trying to get her attention
Respect from the public for her work and accomplishments on our behalf
Respect for standing up for herself

:patriot:

[femmocrat]

1. She IS a Congressmember!

Not "if"!! Read somewhere that she could be charged with assault.

[patrice]

2. McKinney has served her constituency, perfection isn't expected . . .

Respect for one another (as real humans, not plastic dolls) is the beginning of anything that has even the slightest chance of being "Us".

[omega minimo]

5. Esp. if we respect ourselves (& each other) not to be driven to

(The Next Big New Bright & Shiny) distraction!!!!!!!!!!!!

Gee, ya think Rep. McKinney would rather be Working For The American People than this bullshit?

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

45. You Are Absolutely Right. She Made A Mistake, So Be It. But That Doesn't

take away from all the other amazing things she's done as a congresswoman.

[omega minimo]

48. Yer putting words in people's mouth AGAIN

:puke:

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

49. Ya Know, You Puke An Awful Lot. Have You Been Checked Out For That?

Seriously, you should get that looked at. Your health is important. :rofl:

And I put no words in anyone's mouth, and your petty instigations really don't lend any value to the debate of the issues.

[omega minimo]

51. Get thee behind me

:evilfrown:

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

52. I'll Be Sure To.

That way I won't get puked on right?

[Catrina]

62. But what is the mistake she made? I keep asking that. I did find a

statement that was a lie in an article posted here, claiming that she 'apologized for slapping a cop' together with, believe it or not, her own actual words following that totally incorrect interpretation of them. Is that what you're basing your opinion on? If so, you need to read her statement because she never said anything of the kind.

Other than that, I can find zero evidence, other than some reports by 'unidentified sources' that she made any mistake at all. Unless 'looking like a ghetto slut' as Neil Boortz accused her of, is true and/or a mistake.

Please enlighten me, not with your opinion, but with some facts that proves what you just said, that she 'made a mistake'. I will be very grateful to see some real facts, other than the ones I posted above, which, as far as I know, are the only ones available so far.

[bloom]

3. If someone is a progressive, I expect they would support her

unless they had a good reason not to.

Knowing what we know about the MSM - I don't think progressives have a reason yet.

Now Freepers - they would be another story - of course. Freepers would insinuate that she was guilty on the basis of spin- right off the bat. Without evidence. And they would keep on posting such nonsense until more people believed it. I'm sure they all believed the Swift Boat nonsense in a similar way.

Aren't such people supposed to be banned from here? Wouldn't it make a better board if they were? Certainly less hostile. To progressives.

[mondo joe]

10. I've learned to wait and see the evidence.

Even good people make mistakes.

If I'm not going to hold people accountable just because they're in my party I might as well become a Republican.

[bloom]

13. On the basis of some threads around here

One would get the impression that the poster wants her to be found guilty.

One would even get the impression that the poster was clueless about McKinney's contributions to the progressive cause.


I don't know what such people are doing here.

[omega minimo]

19. This tempest in a teapot is Karl Rove's wet dream

:puke:

[mondo joe]

24. One might project whatever one wants.

One might get the impression that some posters don't believe no one is above the law.

I don't know what such people are doing here.

[Catrina]

61. Well, that's true, some posters here seem to think that cops are

above the law and that they are not required to do the job they are being to do.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

65. Firstly, I See No Reason To Believe He Acted Above The Law. Do You

have any facts to support that?

Furthermore, a newbie cop that maybe wasn't as experienced as he could be (though that's conjecture, not in any way fact, he may have done just fine), still does not give her the right to physically engage him, period. I'm not sure why it has been so hard for so many on here to figure out that that act itself is simply wrong. It was wrong. She made a mistake. Yes, sometimes democrats make mistakes too (lieberman for example? lol). Big whoop. She made a mistake. God bless her anyway.

[Catrina]

What act? You keep saying this, but never offer any evidence. I've asked

you for evidence that she did anything wrong, but you just keep repeating 'she made a mistake, she did wrong' with NO evidence, no statement from the cop, no statement from an eyewitness, no video, NOTHING! And in contradiction to Cynthia's statement which you say you read. Do you think she's lying in that statement? And if so, why?

Are you at all concerned that the cop appears to be afraid to make a statement in contradiction to hers? Could that be because there are other eyewitnesses? Why are you so certain he's an innocent newbie? I haven't heard that!

The only evidence so far is Cynthia's statement. She is the only one speaking about it who was actually there. She did not, according to her, physically engage him, HE physically engaged her, causing her to have to move him away so that she could get to her ID which he wanted. Why do you not believe her? I've seen nothing that contradicts her statement. If you have, please post it.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

69. The Wrong Is That She Hit A Cop Inappropriately.

like this quote: " used my arm to get him off of me. "

Sorry, but you don't ever lay a hand on a cop under normal circumstances. Now we may not know what exactly her quite meant, but I'm assuming it was a forward thrust forearm type deal, semi aggressive out of frustration. But out of her mouth herself she says she laid a hand on him. That statement alone is enough for them to pursue charges. The fact that she also hasn't denied ANY of the accusations of her striking an officer have to also be a bit troubling to you, no?

[Catrina]

74. You are losing your argument because you have contradicted

yourself in one post. She did not say she hit a cop inappropriately. She was unable, because of his inappropriate action of rendering her unable to get to her ID which he asked for, to give it to him without using her arm to get him to move away from her. He also failed in his job, by not recognizing someone he was hired to protect.

Inappropriately man-handling anyone, but especially a congressperson you have been hired to protect, is illegal, even if you are a cop.

Cops are not gods, they do bad things, and probably most of them do very good things. This cop had a job to do. Had he not been so inept, the entire incident never would have happened, would it? If I were hired to protect Congresspersons, I would make sure to know what they looked like. For that failure, which no one disputes, he should be reprimanded at the very least.

Try not to see cops as gods. They are no more above the law than anyone else, and when they are hired and paid to do a job, like everyone else, they are expected to do it.

But I can see that you are committed to blame Cynthia McKinney without any evidence, just your assumptions and misinterpretatiions of what she has said, and without any statement by or even knowledge of the cop.

You're entitled to your opinion, but you have failed to give me any information that would cause me, at this point, to hold him blameless, and Cynthia McKinney guilty of anything. So I'll leave it there and wait to see the evidence to support your opinion, which so far has not been presented. :-)

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

75. See, Of All The Accounts I've Seen? That One Is The Most Spun By Far.

It is so obvious in its spin an half truths. Do you really expect the public to by that version? Honestly? That is seriously the version of events that you are convinced went down? No wonder you so strongly support her. Shit, I would too if I believed that wild version of events. I mean, it makes her sound so innocent. But I have a feeling the truth lies a little further away than that, and probably more in line with my theory. But as always, to each their own.

And on a side note, for the record, overall I hate fucking cops. (though respect the hell out of the good ones)

[omega minimo]

79. The previous exchange sums up this mess as played out on DU

Ridiculous statements of admitted "conjecture" presented as truth, countered by reason and requests for facts or evidence. Followed by more mindless but different "conjecture" and NO presentation of fact.

And the open-minded and reasonable are seen as somehow the delusional or prejudiced?

We have to wonder why so may on DU have a vested interest in attacking Cynthia McKinney-- not even supporting her non-committally until all the facts are in.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

46. Hear Hear Mondo Joe. Maintaining Objectivity and Integrity Even In The

face of an undesired outcome is most definitely honorable. I give you kudos for it.

[rd_kent]

31. Here's what really bothers me!!!

She complains that this is racially motivated. Not a big fan of anyone who does not follow the rules, admits they did not follow the rules, gets busted for not following the rules, then screams "RACISM"! And on top of it all, she admits she hit the officer. IMHO, she is lucky she did not get put on the ground. As a public servant and represntative of the people, at a MINIMUM, she should not use violence in retaliation for a percieved wrong.


http://www.wsbtv.com/news/8361195/detail.html

[Catrina]

50. You didn't read Cynthia's statement, did you? You read the editorialized

interpretation of what she herself said and decided not to bother with the rest, it seems. Let's compare the deliberately misleading statement in the article, and Cynthia's own words:

In that statement she expresses regret for slapping a police officer who stopped her at a security check point.

And here's Cynthia's actual statement which follows:

This morning at approximately 8:57 am, I was going to a Budget Committee meeting due to start at 9:00 am. I was rushing to my meeting when a white police officer yelled to me. He approached me, bodyblocked me, physically touching me. I used my arm to get him off of me. I told him not to touch me several times. He asked for my ID and I showed it to him. He then let me go and I proceeded to my meeting and I assume that the Police Officer resumed his duties

That article is a disgrace and an example of why I believe NOTHING I read or hear in the media. It helps if you don't buy rightwing spin and then spread around before checking whether or not it is true.

Where is the cop's statement btw? And why have we not heard from him? This is Cynthia's account, the only person so far who was actually there that we have heard from. All other reports are presumably from individuals who were NOT there. When we hear from the 'unidentified cop' we can compare her story with his. But for some reason, we aren't hearing from him.

And now we hear that there's no video of the incident, only of Cynthia going through the turnstyle. How odd!! Why would the rest of the video not be available??

[omega minimo]

60. Thank you Catrina for posting here what seems to be the only specific

info available. People want to make what they want to of "I used my arm to get him off of me." Assumptions abound. It sounds to me-- if I were to have an uninformed opinion-- like a natural response, not necessarily a "violent" one.

Life in the spin zone through the looking glass is insane.

[rd_kent]

83. I see it differently, thats all.

I did read the entire statement, thats why I posted the link to it along with the story.
While her version seems very low key and uneventful, say goes to great lengths both before and after her account of the story to paint a very racially motiviated picture. If that aint spin, I dont know what is!
Heres the meat: "I was rushing to my meeting when a white police officer yelled to me. He approached me, bodyblocked me, physically touching me. I used my arm to get him off of me. I told him not to touch me several times. He asked for my ID and I showed it to him. He then let me go and I proceeded to my meeting and I assume that the Police Officer resumed his duties".
1. "He approached me, bodyblocked me, physically touching me". Well, thats what police officers do. It their job. If the officer felt she was more of threat, he wouyld have put her on the ground.
2. "I used my arm to get him off of me. I told him not to touch me several times." At this point, she is guilty of assaulting a Police officer. And who is she to tell a P.O. not to touch her. Again, she is very lucky she didnt get put down. IMO, the P.O. is showing lots of restraint here.
3. "He asked for my ID and I showed it to him. He then let me go and I proceeded to my meeting and I assume that the Police Officer resumed his duties." Well, thats that then. The P.O. got what he needed and the Congresswoman went on her way.


All in all, it seems not much took place, by her own account, so why is she screaming racism? I just dont see what she is all upset about! Oh, wait, I know, she said it at the beginning of her statement. "Throughout my tenure in Congress, I seem to evoke memory loss, especially from certain police officers who claim not to be able to recognize my face while I go to work everyday, representing the people of Georgia's 4th Congressional District." Ahh, so there it is. A big, giant EGO that was bruised!!!!

[omega minimo]

84. You've heard of racial profiling?

The reason that police depts. conduct intensive studies of racial profiling by their officers is that oftentimes it is subconscious and invisibly embedded in the internalized attitudes of people, including police.

Most of the discussions and enflamed opinions on DU the past few days have been based on very little information about what actually happened. It seems short-sighted to not acknowledge that the visual impression of who he was pursuing affected the WAY that the officer halted Rep. McKinney. That's pretty basic. To make opinionated accusations about it without any facts-- and without considering if he treated her differently because she was female and African American-- is incomplete, shortsighted and unfair.

"I used my arm to get him off of me." Hey, maybe she used Mr. Miagi's washing the car move. Folks assuming that action was "violent" or "guilty of assaulting" or used "violence in retaliation for a percieved wrong" is reaching way beyond any available information.

I've seen comments on DU that a discussion board should not be expected to take a considered or considerate approach such as "innocent until proven guilty." However, anyone who expresses the clear bias in favor of police version of events (even when that version is imaginary because no actual statement has been made available) would be removed from a jury in the real world.

"Well, thats what police officers do. It their job. If the officer felt she was more of threat, he wouyld have put her on the ground...At this point, she is guilty of assaulting a Police officer. And who is she to tell a P.O. not to touch her. Again, she is very lucky she didnt get put down. IMO, the P.O. is showing lots of restraint here...Well, thats that then. The P.O. got what he needed and the Congresswoman went on her way."

The lawyers go through several rounds of selection and most of the questions amount to the same thing: "Do you think police are always right and always honest or have any reason to think otherwise?"

They are trying to eliimate potential jurors who are prejudiced IN EITHER DIRECTION.

I sat on a jury (in a case where there were only two witnesses: the cop and the defendent) of people mostly ready to side with the cop and convict the guy within the first ten minutes, based on what THEY would do and because "EVERYBODY lies about traffic tickets and it's ONLY a traffic violation" and based NOT AT ALL on the EVIDENCE. There was none. There was only He said He said.

Two people asked questions about the case-- a white woman and a black man who also happened to be a local video journalist. Plus a hispanic woman and an asian woman eventually decided that maybe the guy wasn't automatically guilty because the cop said so. Many in the jury assumed the guy was guilty because of an action that he took BUT he was never asked by either lawyer WHY he did it. We stayed after and asked him about it. His answer was something NO ONE had guessed at and made PERFECT sense if he was innocent.

A white woman, a black man, a Latina and an Asian woman may have had some experience or insight about profiling that MADE THEM THINK ABOUT WHAT THEY WERE DOING TO ANOTHER HUMAN BEING. They were able to CONSIDER THE EVIDENCE without making unwarranted and hasty assumptions.

The rest of them were a mindless lynch mob who wanted to get it over with and get on with their lives. It was fuckin scary. And un-American.

:patriot:

[rd_kent]

85. You make some great points!

And I see where you are coming from. It's just my opinion that the police are the ones to be given the benifit of the doubt first when it becomes a he said, she said. I based MY opinion on HER statement. I read what she said happened, and from HER account, I side with the cop. Again, I base MY opinion on HER account of the incident.

[omega minimo]

86. The day blacks & women get respect like whites & men do--this will be moot

A real "non-story."

Hey there, rd_kent, much obliged-- thanks for givin' it a go. In trying to guess who did what, without insulting the officer, I could suppose that maybe security folks, esp. in D.C., are on a hair trigger these days.

Today I read the statement of non-support lacking the benefit of the doubt that Speaker Pelosi made about C.M. "If it happened, I don't think it was justified." So even the Dem Min. Spkr. is ready to jump the gun with unfounded assumptions and leave her Dem. Congressional colleague hanging out ot dry.

:hi:

[gatorboy]

4. I can't believe how much people have inflated this story.

Granted, the Repugs have been dying to find one accusation to use against the Democrats...ANY Democrat. But the coverage this is getting, you'd think this story was "No WMD's", Katrina, Plamegate and Abramoff combined!

[bemildred]

9. It's almost like there is some sort of orchestrated campaign to manage our

opinions or besmirch her name going on isn't it?
:tinfoilhat::rofl:

[babylonsister]

6. May I just say, not all Congresscritters deserve respect.

But Rep. McKinney most certainly does!:patriot:

[omega minimo]

12. Ya got me there

...with a TWIST!! :evilgrin: :hi:

[babylonsister]

14. I know, you were about to chew me out, weren't ya?

:evilgrin: :toast:

[omega minimo]

17. Respecting the Holder for the sake of the Office is sooooooooo

:yoiks: Last Millennium!

[SPKrazy]

7. Well She'd Be About The First That Got It From The Media

or here on these boards

I'll respect McKinney

but if she is proven to have done what she is accused of

you'll see no respect from me.

[omega minimo]

22. Boorst's slurs prove that Hate Wingers are totally fuckin insane

:thumbsdown:

[MuseRider]

8. She deserves the respect

by all those making negative comments about her simply because she is a human being. As for what you said absolutely. I simply can't stand the fact that she is getting bashed like she has no feelings or rights as a human being who just might, and does, have her own side of the story.

[AtomicKitten]

11. Ms. McKinney should have followed protocol and worn her ID.

And, if not, she should not have been upset that she was stopped. To expect special privileges is arrogant, and bellyaching about it now is embarrassing. She is wrong in this situation.

[omega minimo]

15. ...or at least taken the "Kick Me" sign off of her back!

:evilgrin:

I dunno AK, is that enforced consistently re: the badges?

IMHO it all depends on the manner in which she was stopped-- was it unecessarily rough? Was it different b/c she was a black woman (or Cynthia McK) rather than tall, slimy, red-faced white man in a shiny wig? If the guard overreacted or reacted improperly, wouldn't it be understandable for Rep. McK to react in some way?

How much of this has been defined at this time?

:shrug:

[bemildred]

16. Nothing, it's all bullshit so far.

And there is a tape, but we are not worthy to see it.

[omega minimo]

18. The Plame Game

:evilfrown:

[bemildred]

21. Yeah, I always wonder whether its a job or volunteer work.

I'd make them pay me.

[bobbieinok]

87. a congress woman is quoted as saying they are NOT required to wear

ID......this statement was posted in another DU thread on this

[omega minimo]

88. OMG A FACT!!!!!!!!

:wow: :bounce: :hi:


Thank you bobbieinok

Link if you like, that would be splendid.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

20. If She's A Congresswoman, She Also Needs To Respect The Law.

Definitely not a one sided issue here.

[radwriter0555]

23. Why are the rules for republicans different than the rules for black

democrat women?

[mondo joe]

25. Since when do dems advocate for different rules?

Aren't we the party that says NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW?

If that's just BS and we only mean it to apply to republicans, someone please tell me.

[omega minimo]

27. Since when is someone guilty until proven innocent?

Rep. McKinney is being trashed in the court of public opinion-- by Pugs AND Dems!! :crazy:

Let's see the tape. And let's not add fuel to KKKarl Rove's latest bonfire......................................

[mondo joe]

29. Who convicted her? No one. Put away your straw man.

The presumption of innocence is a principle of the judiciary - not a rule of message boards.

Do you think dems are above the law?

If that's how the party is going someone let me know so I can just move to Canada and leave this country to people with no value greater than us vs them.

[omega minimo]

32. Fighting about this on DU is asinine

I think you just helped KKKarl spill a few more unconceived unborn
:sarcasm:

Speaking of "strawman":

"Do you think dems are above the law?"

HOMEY DON'T PLAY DAT :evilfrown:

ONCE AGAIN ON DU THE CONCEPT OF R-E-S-P-E-C-T IS TOO MUCH FOR SOME FOLKS TO HANDLE.

:patriot:

[mondo joe]

33. Fighting about dem values is asinine?

Too bad.

[omega minimo]

38. If you have any solid info or links on what actually happened

that would be something.

If you wanna have a fight about "dem values" that's probably another thread.

This one suggested an appropriate level of respect. That's all. :thumbsup:

[mondo joe]

40. Oh okay. Well, respect is fine, but when it turns into blind faith it

stinks.

Thanks. :-)

[omega minimo]

42. A mind is like a parachute

made of hemp used by GHW Bush in WWII--- practical, flexible and strong.

:hi:

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

36. Respect Would Be First and Foremost Understanding That Others

may have different opinions on the subject. The harrasment that so many DU'ers who think Cynthia made a mistake have had to endure simply because they are being reasonable, deductive, objective and acting with integrity is just plain staggering. Group think, refusing to think for ourselves and refusal to admit minor mistakes is best left to the neocons, with all due respect Omeg.

[omega minimo]

39. I'm staying out of the uninformed/opinionated circle jerks

where apparently you have suffered so much "The harrasment that so many DU'ers who think Cynthia made a mistake have had to endure simply because they are being reasonable, deductive, objective and acting with integrity is just plain staggering." :cry:

What's truly "staggering" is that "so many DUers" may think "they are being reasonable, deductive, objective and acting with integrity" with so little genuine information.

And yes, you may add "genuine" to your vocabulary, as you did "integrity."

:spray:

You're welcome.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

41. Some Of Us Can Make Reasonable and GENUINE (haha) Deductions More

quickly than others. There has been plenty of information by now for me to make an informed opinion. I understand you don't like that opinion, but then I generally don't arrive at my opinions solely to satify you and gain your approval either. So you can have your opinion, I can have mine and the world can be in harmony.

[Name removed]

43. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

71. I Gotta Give You Your Props Name Removed, So Far You've Been The

most quiet and fair one in here. Just sittin back, takin it all in, trying to be objective right. It's nice to see a post not full bitter rage. And it's even educational! So how do you feel about this cynthia debacle name removed. Me? I feel bad it had to happen, but can't say what she did wasn't wrong. But we all make mistakes name removed, she'll be just fine. She's a warrior.
Anyway, thanks for the civility and God bless you, name removed!


(the following was brought to you by an ambien induced zombie who really needs to stop talking now and lay his ass in bed)

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

35. With All Due Respect, 2 Press Conferences With Celebrities Is Not Exactly

keeping a low profile. Sure, the RW is probably pushing this to the hilt. But shit, wouldn't we if this happened on their side? Of course we would. But sometimes ya gotta take your lumps. She made a mistake, she should acknowledge it, and we should get back to important business. It seems far too late for that now, but I'm hoping this all still somehow blows over.

And for the record, I'm not trashing her. This doesn't undermine all the great things she's done. But we're discussing this one situation and our deductions of it, and I have deduced that she erred in judgement. So be it. But I'm not basing that off of the MSM or RW spin. 90% of my opinion has been forged from her own statements, her own actions (press conferences), and her own live words in interviews. It is what it is.

[Catrina]

53. So, are cops above the law? This cop is AWOL, why? What does HE

have to say about the incident? Why do we not know that? Cynthia's statement is there for you to read and the only account by someone who was actually there so far. Until we hear from him, and learn something about him (we know ALL about Cynthia, eg, she has always been a truth-teller) we really shouldn't take his word, which we haven't yet heard, for anything, should we??

I give Cynthia the benefit of the doubt here, because I know something about her. I can't give any benefit of anything to a mysteriously anonymous cop whose ID is being protected for some reason.

Do you agree that Cynthia looks like a 'ghetto slut' and maybe that's the cop's excuse for man-handling her? That seems to the rightwing's defense of his actions. No racism there of course! :sarcasm:

[mondo joe]

77. Who ever said he should above the law?

And since when is he Absent Without Leave?????

I haven't based ANYTHING on his word - only what she has so far admitted.

Your last paragraph is insulting and uncalled for. Please try to treat your fellow DU members with some civility.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

34. Actually You Need To Reverse That Question And Ask It To Yourself.

As in why do we demand that republicans uphold the law and fight vehemently for that concept, but yet some here can so easily ignore the law when it comes to someone on our side? See, to me that is the epitomy of hypocrisy, and I'll take no part in it. I'll maintain my integrity and be able to look at all issues objectively, even when I don't like the outcome.

The rules aren't different. They all should uphold the law. That doesn't mean that those that do are all treated equally, since as we know the neocons have gotten away with murder and then some. But it isn't about whether or not the republicans are ethical when it comes to the rule of law. We know they aren't. But you damn well better bet your ass we should be ethical with it, or we are no better then they. And I'll tell you what, we are far better than they.

[Catrina]

58. IF she had broken the law, you would have a point. I have no evidence

of that, have you? And, btw, you will score no points with the abusers on the right by going overboard to try to be fair! They are and have been out to get Cynthia McKinney for a long time ~ because she spoke the truth! I certainly won't help them unless she actually did break the law. I'm waiting to see some evidence of that. Apparently we won't. The video, it is being reported, stops just in time not to provide the evidence. This could be another story of course.

The only thing that has remained constant in this whole story has been Cynthia's own account. And she was there. All the rest is not coming from anyone who was there, is it?

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

68. By Her Own Admission She Broke The Law.

She says there was a physical confrontation, said she used her arms, and said the gaurd had to chase her down as she kept walking past his calls for her to stop. She doesn't explicity she struck him with her forearm, but from her words and interviews it seems quite reasonable to think so, since she just dances around the question in such a nonsensical way as if coached by lawyers, which is exactly what defendandts do when they know they're in trouble. We all know and love cynthia. We all respect what she's done. But if she wasn't guilty, we all know her well enough to know she would be spouting what happened from the rooftops. Everyone would know exactly what she did and why, and every one would know exactly how the cop did it and why, and she'd make it very clear that she did no wrong and that the merits will speak for themselves. Unfortunately I haven't seen that. I've seen grandstanding, dancing around the issues, character assassinations, pr tours, but no real details as to the truth of her physical confrontation with the officer, or his part in it. It is those lack of details, being hidden by the drama of the pressconferences and interview and racial wars, that lead me to believe she more likely guilty than not.

[Catrina]

54. The cop needs to respect the law also, doesn't he? Why assume she

didn't and he did? She has told us her version of the story, he has not. So whose version are we hearing when 'anonymous sources' keep changing the story? Cynthia's hasn't changed ~ I'm waiting to hear from him ~ it's been days now, and he's still in hiding.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

56. I Have Heard Nothing That Indicates He Acted In Any Illegal Fashion

whatsoever. If it comes to light that he did, then he should be held accountable as well. No one, cops, congresswomen, presidents or otherwise, are above the law.

[Catrina]

59. Then you haven't read Cynthia's account, or the job description of

Capitol Hill police ~

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

63. Actually I Have, Over And Over Again. I Also Read And Heard Her Cry Out

blatant racism. She has said several things, but has given no details whatsoever. From taking it all in, it appears the cop called out to her several times, she ignored out of disgust, kept walking though she didn't go through security, and then the officer had to bodyblock her to keep her from continuing her defiance of his calls to stop. He may have put his hand on her to assist in her not going any further, but in the capacity of the law and security that is in no way greater force than necessary. Unless he pushed her up against a wall, grabbed and pulled her forcefully, pushed her hard that she fell down, or struck her in some way, there is no reason to believe excessive force was used: or at least from ANY accounts available right now.

I don't have the slightest problem at this point believing she was late and in a rush, irritated and frustrated that this newbie cop dared not recognize her, and overreacted in being agressive towards him due to her frustration of being profiled in the past. She erred in judgement and acted impulsively and illegally. I have no problem saying that either, as it appears to be the truth. I have repeated multiple times, however, that it was just a mistake. I have repeated that it in no way undermines all of the incredible things she's done and will continue to do. I am merely stating my objective, reasonable and in my opinion more than likely accurate opinion on this incident, just for sake of discussion of this incident. It was just a mistake. We all make them. We live, we learn, we own up to them and we move on, like adults should always do.

[Catrina]

64. He did grab her according to the only eyewitness account (hers) we have

heard so far.

You just repeated the 'unidentified sources' account of the incident. That is NOT her account. Those 'sources' were not there, were they? She was.

Whose accounts are you citing? The cop's? Could you link me to some EYEWITNESS accounts? I have read all the varying accounts by 'unknown sources' one of which you just repeated above.

If you actually did read hers, you would see that she completely contradicts those mysterious unknown sources, yet you BELIEVE people whose identities you don't even know, and whose reports have changed several times over the past few days!!

You are trying to claim the moral ground here. If that's what you want to do then you must stick to FACTS, not rumors.

I provided the only FACTS we have so far in a previous post which you apparently haven't seen, you are providing gossip and giving the benefit of the doubt to gossip. That is not the way to gain the moral high ground, is it?

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

73. Not Sure Where Your Problem Lies

I said that he laid an arm on her to assist in restraining her. What you need to understand is that is PERFECTLY NORMAL POLICE PROCEDURE! That what they do to people who ignore security, ignore repeated calls to stop and continue to keep going.

Here are some facts:
She was in a rush, she was frustrated.
she has had incidents with racial profiling in the past and has a chip on her shoulder with it.
she wasn't wearing her pin
she dramatically changed her appearance, to the degree that even I had to do a quick double take at first.
She walked around the security gate while not being recognized by the guard.

The cop calls out for her to stop several times while she ignores him.

When the cop catches up, not knowing who he's dealing with, he bodyblocks her and uses mild restraint techniques to keep her from going further. She uses her arm agressively to get him off of her, probably while saying something along the lines of "get your hands off of me I'm a proud congresswoman". He backs off a bit, she shows her ID (finally), and they both go their seperate ways.

Now I don't know why this re-enactment is so hard to swallow by so many. It is as obvious as day to me when I look at it objectively, and it makes a whole lot of sense. I think we risk looking like fools defending this to death when there is so much more to lean against her than there is to lean towards her, on this issue.

To each their own, but just try and understand where I'm coming from.

[Catrina]

76. Wow. You certainly are embelishing the only actual account by

a participant in this incident with your own interpretations and you wonder why people have a problem with your 'opinion'?

The cop calls out for her to stop several times while she ignores him.

Since so far, there is only Cynthia's account of the incident, and she did not say this, where did you get this information?

When the cop catches up, not knowing who he's dealing with, he bodyblocks her and uses mild restraint techniques to keep her from going further.

Again, where did this information come from? Is there a video, an eyewitness, even a statement from the actual cop who was involved, anything to contradict the only account by an actual eyewitness so far? I have repeatedly asked you for 'evidence' not your interpretation of this incident. But again, you do not provide facts, just your opinion, assumption, deduction, interpretation. Do you see why you are not credible?

And this is really stunning ~ where on earth did you get this from? I do hope you are never on a jury ~

She uses her arm agressively to get him off of her, probably while saying something along the lines of "get your hands off of me I'm a proud congresswoman". He backs off a bit, she shows her ID (finally), and they both go their seperate ways

Unbelievable, really!! First, you now change your previous claim that she 'slapped' him to 'using her arm aggressively' after I provided you with her actual statement. What this means to me is that you were willing to claim she slapped him WITHOUT any proof and then changed your claim to another incredibly wrong interpretation of what she actually said, and which no one who was there has contradicted.

You added 'aggressively' to her statement, abandoned your previous claim of 'slapped' and then even worse, actually add words you have simply made up 'I'm a proud congresswoman??? Incredible!! I hope those in charge of this case are not as prone to fantasy as you are, although I fear they may be.

And you finish with this, an actual admission that all you are able to provide to support your claim that she is guilty of anything and the unknown cop, completely innocent:

Now I don't know why this re-enactment is so hard to swallow by so many. It is as obvious as day to me when I look at it objectively, and it makes a whole lot of sense.

Making up words that even the cops don't claim she said, maybe? Adding words to her statement that aren't there, perhaps? And you wonder why your 're-enactment' is hard to swallow by so many?' Then you claim to be objective, this after adding your own words, putting words which she never said in Ms. McKinney's mouth and 're-enacting' a scenario you have absolutely no way of knowing anything about unless you were there?

I think I'm wasting my time ~ enjoy your fantasy, I'll wait for the facts, meantime with the facts that are available, it is my opinion that Cynthia did nothing wrong, that she has been wronged, and that the cop was incapable of doing the job he was hired to do.

[Justice Is Comin]

67. The problem is

that she escalated the situation. There is her statement which leads a prudent person to believe that she was spoken to before any touching. If not, it is a far stretch to think the policeman would just "body block" her for no reason.

With that logical re-enactment of events as they developed at the scene, all she would have had to do is say, officer I am Congresswoman McKinney when he was yelling at her. The police account is that the officer called out for her 3 times. By her own statement she doesn't say anything about announcing who she was before she showed her ID after the physical confrontation.

That is going to be shown as disrespect for the Capitol police authority. She could have de-escalated the tension which she did not do. She chose to ignore his calls for her to stop. It is silly to think the officer would have concocted the aggression because she was black. And even though you may be in the right, you cannot resist an officer of the law merely because he asks you to stop.

Any police officer has the right to "detain" you for what he believes to be a reasonable cause. If the detainment results in arrest, there is a rare provision in the law to resist an unlawful arrest but even then you would have to prove the arrest was unlawful before a judge. There is no provision in the law to ignore a police officers commands to stop you for questioning.

This is the hurdle she is going to have to get over.

Having said all this, nobody is laying in the morgue and this should not have gotten to this level of potential prosecution. In fact, I don't think it will. Calmer minds will prevail and this will go away for the benefit of all concerned.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

72. Absolutely Agree!!!!! But The Press Conferences, Danny Glover, The News

appearances, she has been the largest cause of its perpetuation right now, hands down. i wish she would've, after session, just apologized to the cop for being frustrated, and that she's dealt with harrasment before due to racial profiling, but that she realizes in this case she overreacted and please accept my apology. Had that occurred, I doubt this story would have a fifth of the legs it has now.

[Catrina]

66. I have heard nothing other than rightwing rumor and unknown sources

that indicates Cynthia acted in an illegal fashion either, yet you defend him and claim she made a mistake! Why? What facts do you have to base that opinion on? Cops are not above the law, in theory anyway. I'm surprised you are not anxious to sort out the many contradictory statements made by these 'unknown sources' over the past few days, especially since Cynthia's account has remained unchanged. I would like to hear HIS version of the story. I'm very concerned about his unwillingness to do that.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

70. Ok, Innocent Question If I May, Honestly.

What are these contradictory statements you keep mentioning? I have really seen them. Can you provide them? So many are referencing them that I'd like to have the chance to read them as well, if you'd so kindly oblige.

[BlooInBloo]

26. You callin her a dick?

:rofl:

[omega minimo]

28. Haven't made it to your McKinney's a Non-Issue thread-- how's that goin'?

:spray:

[BlooInBloo]

30. Sheesh - don't ask....

I've let it go... lol - you might also, unless you got a stronger constitution than me....

[Maddy McCall]

37. No, her status as a congresswoman does not guarantee her respect.

However, on many occasions she has earned my respect, and therefore receives it.

[omega minimo]

44. Indeed. She is the hardworking, courageous Dem DU claims it needs more of!

:bounce: :bounce:

[entanglement]

47. They hate her and will do anything to destroy her

They don't see Congresswoman McKinney, they see an 'uppity' Negro woman who needs to be 'put in her place'

[Catrina]

55. They can sit back and watch, the 'left' apparently is doing it for them!

[omega minimo]

57. Uppity Women & Cool Men Unite!

:thumbsup: :grouphug: :kick:

[lukasahero]

78. Something about those black women and being 'man'-handled

It's interesting to compare the reaction of some people about this incident to the incident involving those 'poor boys' accused at Duke.

Of course, they should not be condemned until all the facts concerning the case are known.

Ms. McKinney, apparently, does not deserve the same respect.

[omega minimo]

80. Are you trying to make it sound like there's some sort of double standard?

:wow:

[in_cog_ni_to]

81. If she's a DEMOCRATIC Congressmember...and she is.

:) She has my respect! Anyone who stands up to the BFEE deserves everyone's respect.:hi:

[philosophie_en_rose]

82. Kick

:kick: