Cynthia McKinney plays with real heart in `Left' field

That’s just a prediction based on my seat in the peanut gallery, but I’m prepared at this point to throw a few more shells into the fray.

In an interview on CNN Wednesday night, McKinney’s lawyer confirmed that representatives of the Capitol Police actually met with the Congresswoman in the wake of the “assault” incident to apologize to the Congresswoman. That sure doesn’t sound like the action of a police department that believes one of its own was the victim of an assault – but rather, it seems to me, indicates they were concerned the police officer acted inappropriately.

McKinney’s attorney, James Myart, also raised an interesting point during the broadcast. If a crime truly was committed by McKinney, he asked, then why wasn’t she arrested on the spot? When’s the last time you heard of someone “assaulting” a cop and being allowed to walk away?

It doesn’t add up. Then, an even more revealing moment occurred on the broadcast when the chief of the Capitol Police, Terrance Gainer, admitted on camera that the Capitol police officer struck first by grabbing McKinney as she was attempting to enter the Capitol office building. That’s an amazing concession, because it is evidence that the police officer initiated the “assault” on McKinney, a U.S. Congresswoman, who arguably was caught off guard and might well have reacted instinctively, in self defense, seeking to put distance between herself and a perceived attacker.

So, let’s recap the game through the first several innings.

The chief of the Capitol Police conceded that his officer grabbed a U.S. Congresswoman. McKinney was not arrested at the time of the incident, and according to Myart, representatives of the police department later apologized to McKinney. It was only later, after the media frenzy heated up, that the Capitol Police began to pursue a criminal case against McKinney.

(And by the way, why would the chief of the Capitol Police appear on national TV to discuss the specific charges in a pending criminal case if this isn’t about feeding a media frenzy? Wouldn’t it be far more prudent for the head of the law enforcement agency leading the criminal investigation to make no comment to avoid compromising the case -- assuming it's a legitimate case?)

Now, it would not surprise me a bit, if prosecutors, in order to avoid being pilloried by the same mainstream media that has gang assaulted McKinney, do take the step of seeking a third-party ruling through a grand jury — if, for no other reason, than to deflect blame when the lights come up on this media circus.

But it is beginning to look more and more like McKinney, at the end of the day, will still be standing in “Left” field, only with a lot more people standing in the field with her, because that’s where this spitball has been hit. And my bet, again from the peanut gallery, is that she’ll have no problem delivering that ball back to the plate, with due speed, for the out.

And for those of you who missed my prior comment on the media’s coverage of the McKinney case, you can check it out below. Think of it as an instant replay.

“The highest respect for the law”

CNN interviewed Cynthia McKinney Monday concerning her run-in with the Capitol Police.

At one point during the interview, CNN anchor Wolf Blitzer pointed out that there are “black” officers with the Capitol Police, as though that somehow nullified McKinney’s charges of racial profiling.

McKinney shot back that CNN needed to do its homework, indicating that there are serious issues of racial profiling within the ranks of the Capitol Police.

From an account of the McKinney interview published Tuesday on CNN.com:

"I don't understand exactly why it is that certain police officers have a problem remembering my face," McKinney said, noting that she is one of 14 black women among the 535 members of Congress. "The issue is racial profiling, and that's something that we're going to have to deal with as a country."

McKinney also said that, within the ranks of the Capitol Police, "there are problems inside with ... the respect for diversity." She did not elaborate, but Myart pointed to a discrimination suit filed by more than 250 black officers against the department.

If CNN’s elite media hounds would have done their homework, before interviewing McKinney and for the story above, they would not have to rely on McKinney to “elaborate” or Myart to point out anything. They could actually quote from the source — the actual lawsuit.

Narco News dug up the information for its recent revelations about the litigation through a simple Google search. Makes you wonder if CNN has access to the same Internet the rest of us use.

(Well, no matter; the CNN story quoted above has since been written over in an update blasting the news that key Democrats are failing to rally behind McKinney -- and the reference to the lawsuit is deleted.)

No surprise there. It’s far easier to paint McKinney as “playing the race card” than it is to confront the very real problem of racial profiling that is part of this story. The reasoning seems to be that even if McKinney was profiled, it doesn’t matter, because she struck an officer of the law.

Well, that might be a supportable line for the media to take, if the issue was that black and white. But, let's assume it's not so clear, as real life tends to be in most cases. If, as McKinney claims, this officer did touch her inappropriately, would she be within her rights to slap the offender -- or at least push him away? Does the uniform excuse all such transgressions? Would it make a difference in the eyes of some people if it was a black officer inappropriately touching a white female?

The reality is that convicting McKinney of anything at this point, particularly from the sidelines in the media, is yet another form of profiling.

If you read the mainstream media’s script of the McKinney incident, almost without exception, you would come away with the impression that she has already been tried and convicted.

That’s the definition of a media lynching.

And everyone likes to watch a hangin’, don’t they?

But I'm curious as to whether any other lawmakers the day of the incident, or recently, were allowed to pass around the metal detector in the Capitol office building without wearing pins identifying them as a members of Congress -- while the same officer that grabbed McKinney was on duty.

If so, were they stopped, and if not, why?

Seems to me that would be a crucial question to at least explore journalistically and otherwise. As I understand it, some folks in Congress frequently don't wear their “security” pins. It would be quite telling to have specific examples. A curious person watching some C-Span video should be able to pick out some faces quite easily -- maybe even from footage of the day McKinney had her encounter with the Capitol Police officer.

I'm surprised no one has stepped forward to date in either party to own up to such behavior -- well, not really -- but I'm sure they would be more forthcoming if forced to testify to the facts in a courtroom, which I suspect all of them would want to avoid in an election year.

After all, how would it look to the voters if a dozen or more of our elected leaders were shown to have walked passed the same police officer that day absent their pins, without being chased down and grabbed by a body part? Would that be deemed evidence of racial profiling or just a case of selective memory at work?

Are we to believe that the officer recognized every other lawmaker but McKinney? Is it possible that no other lawmaker has ever changed their hairstyle other than McKinney?

And for those folks in the mainstream media who insist on continuing to provide disproportionate emphasis to only one side of the allegations in this case (to the exclusion of fairly exploring McKinney’s claim that she is the victim of an unjust application of the law due to racial profiling) I ask you to keep in mind the following words:

I submit that an individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for the law.

— Martin Luther King Jr.