hksigwalther
New member
Oh god mvpel, that is hilarious.
So, do you think you would be let go if told to stop and you struck an officer?
So, do you think you would be let go if told to stop and you struck an officer?
Arrest Warrant Sought for Rep. McKinney
- Thread starter steelheart
- Start date
Mike Irwin
Staff
Looks like Ms. McKinney isn't getting a lot of support from her side of the aisle, and none from the other side...
WASHINGTON - House Republicans pushed a resolution Tuesday commending the Capitol police force for professionalism after a confrontation between an officer and Democratic Rep. Cynthia McKinney.
"I don't think it's fair to attack the Capitol Police and I think it's time that we show our support for them," said Rep. Patrick McHenry, R-N.C., a sponsor of the measure. Ignoring a police officer's order to stop or hitting one "is never OK," McHenry said of the incident, which has exacerbated partisan tensions in the House.
Last week, McKinney had an argument with a uniformed police officer as she sought to enter a House office building. The officer did not recognize her. She refused his order to stop and struck him.
McKinney says she took action in self defense after the officer "inappropriately touched" her.
A spokesman for the congresswoman did not immediately respond Tuesday to a reporter's request for comment on the GOP measure.
The six-term Georgia Democrat says the issue is not about whether to obey a police officer's order, whether she hit him or the fact that she was not wearing the lapel pin that identifies members of Congress.
Her lawyers have said that a series of confrontations between McKinney and U.S. Capitol and White House law enforcement officers who don't recognize her points to a pattern.
"The issue is racial profiling," McKinney, who is black, told CNN Monday.
The resolution being introduced Tuesday came as McKinney awaited a prosecutor's decision on whether to press any criminal charges against her. The Capitol Police on Monday sought an arrest warrant by turning over their investigation of the incident to U.S. Attorney Kenneth L. Wainstein.
The measure put forward Tuesday, which is co-sponsored by Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (news, bio, voting record), R-Fla., would not specifically mention McKinney or the confrontation, McHenry said.
Instead, sponsors said, it would commend the Capitol Police for their professionalism and recognize the challenge of protecting the vast Capitol campus from terrorism and other threats while keeping it open to tourists.
"Every day they exhibit honor, courtesy and professionalism," Diaz-Balart said in a statement.
McKinney says that has not been her experience. She says Capitol Police officers have a long history of failing to recognize her and asking for identification — a pattern she says is racist and in any case highlights a security problem in one of the most well-guarded buildings in the country.
McKinney has drawn little support from her House colleagues, particularly Democrats who are launching an election-year campaign that revolves around the party's commitment to national security.
Her lawyer, James Myart Jr., issued a statement on Friday saying several members of Congress would join McKinney at a press conference on Friday at Howard University.
None did. D.C. Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton issued a statement of concern about the incident and urged the parties to come to an agreement. A spokesman for Rep. Mel Watt, D-N.C., chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus, said he has no comment.
McHenry, who at 30 is the youngest member of Congress, said he is routinely stopped by Capitol Police and asked for identification.
"When I'm not wearing my pin, I am always stopped," McHenry said in a telephone interview. "I accept that as a due course of security."
WASHINGTON - House Republicans pushed a resolution Tuesday commending the Capitol police force for professionalism after a confrontation between an officer and Democratic Rep. Cynthia McKinney.
"I don't think it's fair to attack the Capitol Police and I think it's time that we show our support for them," said Rep. Patrick McHenry, R-N.C., a sponsor of the measure. Ignoring a police officer's order to stop or hitting one "is never OK," McHenry said of the incident, which has exacerbated partisan tensions in the House.
Last week, McKinney had an argument with a uniformed police officer as she sought to enter a House office building. The officer did not recognize her. She refused his order to stop and struck him.
McKinney says she took action in self defense after the officer "inappropriately touched" her.
A spokesman for the congresswoman did not immediately respond Tuesday to a reporter's request for comment on the GOP measure.
The six-term Georgia Democrat says the issue is not about whether to obey a police officer's order, whether she hit him or the fact that she was not wearing the lapel pin that identifies members of Congress.
Her lawyers have said that a series of confrontations between McKinney and U.S. Capitol and White House law enforcement officers who don't recognize her points to a pattern.
"The issue is racial profiling," McKinney, who is black, told CNN Monday.
The resolution being introduced Tuesday came as McKinney awaited a prosecutor's decision on whether to press any criminal charges against her. The Capitol Police on Monday sought an arrest warrant by turning over their investigation of the incident to U.S. Attorney Kenneth L. Wainstein.
The measure put forward Tuesday, which is co-sponsored by Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (news, bio, voting record), R-Fla., would not specifically mention McKinney or the confrontation, McHenry said.
Instead, sponsors said, it would commend the Capitol Police for their professionalism and recognize the challenge of protecting the vast Capitol campus from terrorism and other threats while keeping it open to tourists.
"Every day they exhibit honor, courtesy and professionalism," Diaz-Balart said in a statement.
McKinney says that has not been her experience. She says Capitol Police officers have a long history of failing to recognize her and asking for identification — a pattern she says is racist and in any case highlights a security problem in one of the most well-guarded buildings in the country.
McKinney has drawn little support from her House colleagues, particularly Democrats who are launching an election-year campaign that revolves around the party's commitment to national security.
Her lawyer, James Myart Jr., issued a statement on Friday saying several members of Congress would join McKinney at a press conference on Friday at Howard University.
None did. D.C. Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton issued a statement of concern about the incident and urged the parties to come to an agreement. A spokesman for Rep. Mel Watt, D-N.C., chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus, said he has no comment.
McHenry, who at 30 is the youngest member of Congress, said he is routinely stopped by Capitol Police and asked for identification.
"When I'm not wearing my pin, I am always stopped," McHenry said in a telephone interview. "I accept that as a due course of security."
Unless the Capitol Police want to charge Ms. McKinney with Breach of Peace, the Constitution pretty well has this covered.
See Article I, Section 6 - The Senators and Representatives shall receive a Compensation for their Services, to be ascertained by Law, and paid out of the Treasury of the United States. They shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.
I don't see this going anywhere legally. Politically, on the other hand ...
She obviously feels she is special and not subject to the same rules as the rest of the citizenry. How many of our representatives don't think they're special?
See Article I, Section 6 - The Senators and Representatives shall receive a Compensation for their Services, to be ascertained by Law, and paid out of the Treasury of the United States. They shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.
I don't see this going anywhere legally. Politically, on the other hand ...
She obviously feels she is special and not subject to the same rules as the rest of the citizenry. How many of our representatives don't think they're special?
Mad Martigan
New member
McKinney has forgotten the face of her father.
BreacherUp!
New member
Actually, Congresswoman, this highlights professional security taught at every level. If in doubt, question. Most tightly run secure areas require every person to ID themselves each time they enter the secure area, recognized or not.
She just gave praise to their professionalism w/o knowing it.
Now I remember why I stopped reading/watching the news so closely - I haven't heard boo about this, but I figured it out within a few lines of the report at the front of this thread - SOS, and that ain't nothin' 'bout ships. But I do love the pics a few posts back - hahahaha!
Mad Martigan
New member
For real.
The "CARD"
Thanks, MM. I've passed the link on and I'm still LMAO. PERFECT! I still can't believe that folks want you to "remember" their face, physical attributes, on sight recognition, etc (actually, on second thought, it doesn't surprise me). Capitol Hill used to work like that. Everyone had to know so-in-so on sight. That's not security, that's the definition of a Prima-Donna. "Well, you remember me from XYZ". I've been there, and probably have the T-Shirt. Post 9/11 positively changed all of that, although I positively IDed people LONG before then. "Here's the way it works, you want in - show me the ID, not a profile, face forward, my good side, etc." I could give you all a true scenario of 2 fatalities, an LEO and Bank Manager, based on looks of the BG's, not ID, but I won't go there tonight. Again, thanks for the CARD! (Hmmmm...I see a Cottage Industry here...)
Thanks, MM. I've passed the link on and I'm still LMAO. PERFECT! I still can't believe that folks want you to "remember" their face, physical attributes, on sight recognition, etc (actually, on second thought, it doesn't surprise me). Capitol Hill used to work like that. Everyone had to know so-in-so on sight. That's not security, that's the definition of a Prima-Donna. "Well, you remember me from XYZ". I've been there, and probably have the T-Shirt. Post 9/11 positively changed all of that, although I positively IDed people LONG before then. "Here's the way it works, you want in - show me the ID, not a profile, face forward, my good side, etc." I could give you all a true scenario of 2 fatalities, an LEO and Bank Manager, based on looks of the BG's, not ID, but I won't go there tonight. Again, thanks for the CARD! (Hmmmm...I see a Cottage Industry here...)
I really wasn’t being facetious. There are two sides to every story, and all I have to go on is what the news media reports. However, I don’t automatically discount a claim of racism, as apparently some do in this forum.
I do know some cops are racist, because people in all walks of life can be racist. I also know that some black folks play the so-called “race card”, but that doesn’t mean racial discrimination doesn’t exist. Regrettably, I find it quite easy to believe that a black congresswoman could face a subtle pattern of discrimination – like a policeman who didn’t recognize her although she’s been a member of Congress for twelve years, and walked by him almost every day. But then again, maybe he was new on the job…
Anyway, I’m withholding judgment until all the facts come out, if they ever do…
Regards,
JayCee
Mike Irwin
Staff
"They shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same;"
Breach of the peace is a pretty vague term that defies description.
This clause was inserted into the Constitution to prevent one party from interfering with the legislators from another party as a possible power play. There's a similar clause in English law dealing with members of Parliament.
What McKinney did could be construed to be a breach of the peace in that she allegedly assaulted a police officer in the commission of his duty.
Breach of the peace is a pretty vague term that defies description.
This clause was inserted into the Constitution to prevent one party from interfering with the legislators from another party as a possible power play. There's a similar clause in English law dealing with members of Parliament.
What McKinney did could be construed to be a breach of the peace in that she allegedly assaulted a police officer in the commission of his duty.
JayCee, what you're missing here is a long pattern played out by McKinney and her associates, where she sees racism in every action, no matter how benign. She views her life through race-colored glasses, and thinks that there's far more racial discrimination in the world than there actually is.
This is not to say that racial discrimination doesn't exist, but I'll bet $1,000 that it doesn't exist in as many places as McKinney thinks it does.
Yes, she's been a congresscritter for years - interrupted in 2000 by "the JEWS - J-E-W-S," as her father put it, echoing her supporter Louis Farrakhan - but consider the following images in roughly chronological order:
If you make radical changes to your appearance, don't you think that you should expect that some people might not recognize you without it being "racism?"
She sees "subtle" racism everywhere.
It must be very hard to live her life like that, when you're continually pissed off at everyone around you.
Striking a LEO is absolutely a "breech of the peace", and this is a very broad legal term.
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Breech+of+the+peace
Mike Irwin
Staff
Pipo,
There's aparently some small amount of case law on this subject, as hinted to by an entry in Wikipedia, but I've not been able to find anything concrete.
I'd have to say, though, that the noted clause in the Constitution would not apply as the charges don't stem from an attempt to keep McKinney from fulfilling her duties as an elected official, which is the true intent of the clause.
There's aparently some small amount of case law on this subject, as hinted to by an entry in Wikipedia, but I've not been able to find anything concrete.
I'd have to say, though, that the noted clause in the Constitution would not apply as the charges don't stem from an attempt to keep McKinney from fulfilling her duties as an elected official, which is the true intent of the clause.
Absolutely I agree that striking a police officer could/should be construed as a Breach of the Peace. Any other person would probably still be trying to get bail at this point in time. It could easily be framed by the PR folks that McKinney was rushing to a vote on an important Bill.
However, as with all grey areas in law and politics, we may interpret a situation in our favor today that may come back to bite us later. Shouldn't we be careful to be somewhat dispassionate in our application of the priciples involved? This particular situation sounds as if the right and wrong of it is fairly clear. My point was more in trying to convince those that want to take a legal approach to the situation to consider the alternative political approach.
Any normal person would be justly embarassed to have been involved in this situation. Politicians are masters at contriving, conniving and contorting the meaning of words to suit their purposes. Those like Rep. McKinney have no shame, as evidenced by her finding race problems at every turn. Long after everyone with better things to do grows tired of listening to the BS about racism, heavy handed police, etc., Rep. McKinney will be singing that very same song which obviously plays so well to her constituency. I'll bet Rep. McKiney is polling very high this week in her district for taking it to the Man.
Somehow, people need to develop the idea that our political representatives need to be held to a higher, not lower, standard of behavior. Creatively showing the absurdities of this behavior (ala mvpel above) goes a long way.
It doesn't help that there is no staying power in Congress for those of priciple. Some congressman should be submitting Rep. McKinney for censure or whatever the House rules allow. Failing that, how about a commendation for the officer for doing his job under very trying circumstances.
As with many issues right now, the "conservatives" are responding rather than leading.
However, as with all grey areas in law and politics, we may interpret a situation in our favor today that may come back to bite us later. Shouldn't we be careful to be somewhat dispassionate in our application of the priciples involved? This particular situation sounds as if the right and wrong of it is fairly clear. My point was more in trying to convince those that want to take a legal approach to the situation to consider the alternative political approach.
Any normal person would be justly embarassed to have been involved in this situation. Politicians are masters at contriving, conniving and contorting the meaning of words to suit their purposes. Those like Rep. McKinney have no shame, as evidenced by her finding race problems at every turn. Long after everyone with better things to do grows tired of listening to the BS about racism, heavy handed police, etc., Rep. McKinney will be singing that very same song which obviously plays so well to her constituency. I'll bet Rep. McKiney is polling very high this week in her district for taking it to the Man.
Somehow, people need to develop the idea that our political representatives need to be held to a higher, not lower, standard of behavior. Creatively showing the absurdities of this behavior (ala mvpel above) goes a long way.
It doesn't help that there is no staying power in Congress for those of priciple. Some congressman should be submitting Rep. McKinney for censure or whatever the House rules allow. Failing that, how about a commendation for the officer for doing his job under very trying circumstances.
As with many issues right now, the "conservatives" are responding rather than leading.
Mike Irwin
I have worked every day for 15 years avoiding "breach of the peace".
I repossess 1000 vehicles per year. If a breach of the peace occurs the "self-help" repossession is over in my state. Weather or not a breach of the peace occurred is basically left to "officer discretion". Some LEOs will construe a debtors objection as breach of the peace others will handcuff an unruly debtor and remove the keys from their pocket (this violates the debtors civil rights). It seems very subjective from my experience.
I have worked every day for 15 years avoiding "breach of the peace".
I repossess 1000 vehicles per year. If a breach of the peace occurs the "self-help" repossession is over in my state. Weather or not a breach of the peace occurred is basically left to "officer discretion". Some LEOs will construe a debtors objection as breach of the peace others will handcuff an unruly debtor and remove the keys from their pocket (this violates the debtors civil rights). It seems very subjective from my experience.
Mike Irwin
Staff
"It seems very subjective from my experience."
Which is my point.
The definition of breach of peace isn't just up to the officer solely, though. The prosecutor also has to agree that an incident meets the rather vague description.
Which is my point.
The definition of breach of peace isn't just up to the officer solely, though. The prosecutor also has to agree that an incident meets the rather vague description.