It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Thank God the opponents of Cynthia McKinney didn't get their chance to indict her for this altercation. Just look at the photo used in that article for crying out loud. They are trying to make her look like a wild woman, why? Whats their agenda? Who told them to use that photo?
To continue to harass and harry McKinney because of her politics is atrocious.
I ask people how they would feel if they were in her position. She has been a member of Congress for years and while the rest of the representatives get waved through without any fuss she constantly gets stopped and asked to provide ID. Why? Because she vehemently opposed the Iraq war and demands a new 9/11 inquiry because she believes the whole truth has not come out.
You would find that her position on those issues is supported by a clear majority of Americans yet she is persecuted for it by her peers and the Capitol police.
Even her own party refused to give her seniority back when she won back her post after being the victim of dirty politics.
Originally posted by jsobecky
Well, it's her fault for looking like a jackass. The photo merely captured the "true" Cindy.
Nobody is harassing her because of her politics. You are trying to steer the debate away from the real issue, which is that she committed assault on a Capitol Police officer because she is immature and self-aggrandizing.
Please stop creating straw man arguments.
You would think that maybe she would learn to wear her pin. She's just too stupid to do so. Poor genetics, methinks.
Well, maybe that should tell her something, shouldn't it?
"Clear majority". Riiight... Sez you. And the Capitol Police have a political agenda. Riiight....
Originally posted by jsobecky
You would think that maybe she would learn to wear her pin. She's just too stupid to do so. Poor genetics, methinks.
Originally posted by semperfortis
A crime is a crime is a crime and one who commits a crime is by definition a criminal.
Originally posted by jsobecky
Well, it's her fault for looking like a jackass. The photo merely captured the "true" Cindy.
Originally posted by semperfortis
Conspiracies aside, she assaulted a Police Officer and should have to answer for that.
It was politics that caused the Grand jury to not return an indictment, that much is obvious to a blind man.
A crime is a crime is a crime and one who commits a crime is by definition a criminal. So tout her qualifications all that you want to, she is a criminal that got away with her crime.
ps. I have no idea where her politics are aligned and do not really care, they are completely irrelevant to her assault. As is her standing on Tupac. Why not open the Elvis case as well. Wasn't he just seen in Vegas again?
Originally posted by grimreaper797
Unless you can show me where the incident was documented detail for detail,
A source said an officer, who says Rep. Cynthia McKinney struck him in the chest with a closed fist, knew who she was, and claims the incident has caused infighting among U.S. Capitol Police.
The source, who is close to the ongoing grand jury investigation of the March 29 scuffle, said Paul McKenna, a third year officer in the U.S. Capitol Police, was given a picture of the congresswoman in training.
"No one believes that a man with a name that similar to hers would not know who she is," the source told Redding News Review. "He clearly knew who she was and what she looked like but stopped her anyway."
More...
Source.
Originally posted by semperfortis
It was politics that caused the Grand jury to not return an indictment, that much is obvious to a blind man.
...
ps. I have no idea where her politics are aligned and do not really care..
Originally posted by shots
...that is what happens too John or Jane Q public. Why should she be allowed to get away from it when others are not?
In 2004, the FBI collected data from 10,459 law enforcement agencies that provided services to nearly 226 million persons (76.8 percent of the Nation’s population). The participating law enforcement agencies employed 499,396 officers, and of these, 59,373 were assaulted while performing their duties, a rate of 11.9 assaults per 100 officers. The assaults resulted in injuries to 16,563 of these officers...
Clearances
Law enforcement may clear offenses either by arrest or by exceptional means, i.e., when elements beyond the control of law enforcement prevent the placing of formal charges against the offender. In 2004, law enforcement agencies cleared 87.5 percent of the 59,373 assaults on their officers. By circumstance, these agencies cleared the greatest percentage, 89 percent, of assaults on officers who were responding to disturbance calls (family quarrels, bar fights, etc.). The circumstance with the lowest percentage of clearances, 66.7 percent, was ambush situations. (See Table 66.)
2004 LOEKA Data.
Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Originally posted by semperfortis
A crime is a crime is a crime and one who commits a crime is by definition a criminal.
Not necessarily. I believe there were extenuating circumstances. In other words, as she was rushing to work, a man ran up behind her and grabbed her. She punched him. I would, too! In fact, I would have done more than punch.
Now, I'm not sure that's exactly how it happened, but it's highly possible.
We don't know all the circumstances of this case. But a Grand Jury, who heard both sides of the story, made an informed decision, which is something we don't have the opportunity to do.
She may be guilty. She may have knowingly assaulted a police officer, but apparently the Grand Jury didn't think so.
I hated the way she used race and gender in her argument. I'm very against that. And I also agree that if she has a history of being detained, she should damn well wear her pin.
Originally posted by loam
Originally posted by shots
...that is what happens too John or Jane Q public. Why should she be allowed to get away from it when others are not?
Apparently, some percentage of John or Jane Q public don't get arrested...
In 2004, the FBI collected data from 10,459 law enforcement agencies that provided services to nearly 226 million persons (76.8 percent of the Nation’s population). The participating law enforcement agencies employed 499,396 officers, and of these, 59,373 were assaulted while performing their duties, a rate of 11.9 assaults per 100 officers. The assaults resulted in injuries to 16,563 of these officers...
Clearances
Law enforcement may clear offenses either by arrest or by exceptional means, i.e., when elements beyond the control of law enforcement prevent the placing of formal charges against the offender. In 2004, law enforcement agencies cleared 87.5 percent of the 59,373 assaults on their officers. By circumstance, these agencies cleared the greatest percentage, 89 percent, of assaults on officers who were responding to disturbance calls (family quarrels, bar fights, etc.). The circumstance with the lowest percentage of clearances, 66.7 percent, was ambush situations. (See Table 66.)
2004 LOEKA Data.
(my emphasis,) what are you saying here? In this context and in your chart, assaults "cleared" by arrest were not distiguished from assaults "cleared" by "exceptional means." The only people that we can say for certain were not arrested (from your chart, anyway) are the criminals that assaulted police and then got away clean! You're not endorsing that sort of activity, are you?
Law enforcement may clear offenses either by arrest or by exceptional means...
Originally posted by Harte
Loam,
What's the point you are making here?
Given the following statement from your source:
(my emphasis,) what are you saying here? In this context and in your chart, assaults "cleared" by arrest were not distiguished from assaults "cleared" by "exceptional means."
Law enforcement may clear offenses either by arrest or by exceptional means...
Originally posted by Harte
The only people that we can say for certain were not arrested (from your chart, anyway) are the criminals that assaulted police and then got away clean!
A crime is considered cleared if someone is charged with the crime or if someone is believed to have committed the crime but for some reason (e.g., the death of the suspect, unwillingness of the victim to prosecute) an arrest cannot be made.
Source.
Originally posted by Harte
You're not endorsing that sort of activity, are you?
Originally posted by Harte
It appears to anyone that bothers to carefully read your post that you are just throwing random information out there without really looking at what it says...
Originally posted by Harte
...in some strange attempt to stand up for an egocentric elitist idiot that thinks she's better than everyone else, including her peers in Congress!
Originally posted by Harte
How dare the Capitol Police attempt to ensure that people making entry into the Capitol building actually have some sort of business there! The Capitol police, in your estimation, should ignore the very laws that the Congress passed - just on the other side of the entry they're posted at!
No matter what, the cop, as usual, gets the short end of the political schtick.
Harte