A grand jury has declined to indict Rep. Cynthia McKinney

Status
Not open for further replies.
Why should she be charged? She's a member of Congress. I hope you're not naive enough to believe for one minute that they're like us.
 
"White people"?!? What does this have to do with white people? It's not a commentary on 'offsetting sins'. Rep. McKinney is a lout, no 2 ways about it.
This is a commentary on the relative reception between this thread and the Rove thread. Only a truly partisan person would have a different opinion about these two cases.
 
Only a truly partisan person would have a different opinion about these two cases.
Click to expand...
Only a true partisan person would have the same opinion on these two very different cases. Back at ya, GoSlash.

There is nothing similar in the cases. Intentional or not, it is a thread hijack. Let's keep this thread to the case at hand.
 
Considering that her actions where not sufficient to cause the officer to arrest her at the time of the event, I think that little or no harm was done. It is my view that the decision of the grand jury was appropriate.

Respectfully,
Richard
 
Antipitas,
No, a partisan lefty would say that McKinney was a victim of Republican politics and while Rove got off due to his political clout.
A righty would say the opposite.
I'm saying that justice was not served in either case. Now how is that partisan? Or is it your view that anything not 100% pro-Republican is therefore 100% pro-Democrat?

Nevermind. I will abide by your wishes and end this line of thought within this thread, but I will address it in a new thread.

Going on strictly the merits (or lack thereof) of the McKinney case, let's review:
She appeared before the Grand Jury, a body of average citizens.
They heard all the evidence and testimony.
They declined to indict.
What's the big problem here? How did her 'political influence' affect the deliberations of a Grand Jury? Methinks all this wailing and gnashing of teeth has more to do with her politics than her actions.
 
Actually I am unaware of any legitimate evidence against Rove. Nothing more than a leftist and media smear campaign there. Meanwhile there is no possibility McKinney is not guilty. The jury simply chose, for probable political and/or racial reasons, to not indict. Also, the cop allowed her to walk, as I understand it, because of her status, not because there was insufficient reason to arrest the race-baiting POS.
 
Heist,
You miss my point. Yes, McKinney is a race baiter. She's a racist too. No argument here. I am fully aware that racists exist in all shapes and colors.
But 2nd here claims "probable racism" in the decision which is (drum roll) race baiting. Which is definitely a case of the pot calling the kettle....uhh....black. :cool:

Does anybody here know what the racial makeup of the jury was?
 
Not certain you understand the point you are trying to make, Slash.

The only reason to not indict her is because of the stink she will make. The stink will be racial because she is a race-baiter, hence she avoided indictment directly because of racial issues. Racial issues SHE would bring into play, for lack of any logical defense on her part.

Clear as mud?
 
Not really. You're claiming racism was involved with no evidence to back it up. That's race-baiting. :)

Furthermore that speculation is unfounded and illogical. Why would a group of random citizens care about her racist histrionics? They wouldn't.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top