Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

Dad doesn’t follow Potemkin Townhall Q&A charade … [Darleen Click]

… ejected, arrested, facing 6 months in jail and $2,500 fine.

A father in Towson, Maryland, was forcefully ejected from a local town hall forum for asking the wrong question.

Robert Small had concerns over the Common Core education initiative, feeling that it was dumbing down the curriculum in his local school district.

“My question is, how does lowering America’s educational standards prepare kids for community college?” asked Small, before soon being approached by a security guard — who was also an off-duty cop — and being dragged away from his seat.

The outspoken father then implored the crowd to take action. “Don’t stand for this,” said Small. “You’re sitting here like cowards. You have questions!”

Apparently, Small didn’t follow the proper protocol of submitting his question in writing ahead of the meeting, which is why he was taken outside, and eventually arrested.

Watch the video at the link and see how much America has been fundamentally transformed.

94 Replies to “Dad doesn’t follow Potemkin Townhall Q&A charade … [Darleen Click]”

  1. LBascom says:

    Don’t taz me bro!

  2. sdferr says:

    One may momentarily wonder who Mr. Small thinks he is to believe he can distinguish high educational standards from low, when his touchstone of excellence is Harvard University? Why Harvard? Just because it’s the oldest? That seems silly on its face in a new world which has no particular attachment to posterity. Or because it’s the richest? But what exactly makes riches a source of wisdom regarding education? Or is the invocation of Harvard’s name just a habit? But why should habit rule in serious questions of excellence?

  3. Shermlaw says:

    Charges will be quietly dismissed, of course, because of that whole 1st Amendment thingy. But the damage is done: Citizen pulled out of meeting–check; public officials not required to answer to citizens–check; peaceable assembly and free speech chilled–check and check.

  4. leigh says:

    Cowardly citizens allow Mr. Small to be dragged out?

    Police State: 1
    Citizens: 0

  5. Dalekhunter says:

    Revulsion towards state violence and police brutality is one of the few things that manages to bridge the ideological divide. I had no idea this happened due to a lack of reporting in … certain corners of the internet, it’s truly terrifying. I made sure to share it and spread the word. They should crowdsource a legal defense fund.

    “return I will to old Brazil”

  6. Pablo says:

    O_o

    Heavens to Murgatroyd! What light through yonder window breaks?

    That cop? Needs to be prosecuted. Perjury is a felony, as is kidnapping. Then he needs to be sued. Defamation, false imprisonment, etc…

  7. guinspen says:

    Over by Legal Insurrection.

    Via Mediate, Fox’s Wallace Stunned: GOP Leaders Sent Me Opposition Research on Ted Cruz:

    Fox News Sunday host Chris Wallace said Sunday morning that he’d received opposition research from other Republicans about Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) in advance of Cruz’s appearance this morning, a serious indication of how upset the GOP is with the Senator leading the risky charge to defund ObamaCare.

    “This has been one of the strangest weeks I’ve ever had in Washington,” Wallace said. “As soon as we listed Ted Cruz as our featured guest this week, I got unsolicited research and questions, not from Democrats but from top Republicans, to hammer Cruz.”

    The stench of staunch.

  8. geoffb says:

    Why Harvard?

    Costliest. He’s still under the illusion that price = quality. Wherever a governmental thumb is on the scale that has never been true.

  9. CarsInDepth.com says:

    Quite amazing how the cop brazenly lied and claimed that Small tried to push him away when he first approached him, the supposed basis for charging him with assaulting a police officer. The video says otherwise.

  10. cranky-d says:

    Did the off-duty cop identify himself as a police officer? If not, he was just another citizen.

    More of an asshole than many, but still a citizen.

  11. LBascom says:

    I think I read somewhere the citizen asked, and the cop showed a badge.

    I’m not sure that’s even cool if he was just moonlighting as security rather than on duty as a sworn officer.

  12. geoffb says:

    Pushing would be battery, but then, “Sometimes assault is defined loosely to include battery.”

  13. Pablo says:

    Yes, he shows a badge. Which is irrelevant right up until the point where he arrests Mr. Small.

  14. Pablo says:

    Raw video here.

  15. sdferr says:

    You can get a longer gander of the whole thing here.

  16. cranky-d says:

    I did not watch the video. Reading about it is infuriating enough.

    The police often seem to believe that advancing fascism is a good thing.

  17. geoffb says:

    I think they will claim the assault is is at 2:10 when he turns and extends his arm to point and makes contact with the off-duty cop or the bumping of stomachs at 2:19. All it takes is a touch.

  18. sdferr says:

    The police often seem to believe that advancing fascism is a good thing.

    From a narrow point of view, their public sector unions are a key element in the money-washer cycle of Democrat politics. Too bad the people of the nation don’t notice, and ban the fuckers (public sector unions, that is).

  19. Pablo says:

    Perhaps, geoffb. Probably, even. But first the question would have to arise such that a response is required and when and if that happens that response will be bullshit. He’s not moving toward the thug, the thug is moving into him.

    I suspect they expect that situation never to arise.

  20. newrouter says:

    >All it takes is a touch.<

    Elements

    Generally, the essential elements of assault consist of an act intended to cause an apprehension of harmful or offensive contact that causes apprehension of such contact in the victim.

    The act required for an assault must be overt. Although words alone are insufficient, they might create an assault when coupled with some action that indicates the ability to carry out the threat. A mere threat to harm is not an assault; however, a threat combined with a raised fist might be sufficient if it causes a reasonable apprehension of harm in the victim.Intent is an essential element of assault. In tort law, it can be specific intent—if the assailant intends to cause the apprehension of harmful or offensive contact in the victim—or general intent—if he or she intends to do the act that causes such apprehension. In addition, the intent element is satisfied if it is substantially certain, to a reasonable person, that the act will cause the result. A defendant who holds a gun to a victim’s head possesses the requisite intent, since it is substantially certain that this act will produce an apprehension in the victim. In all cases, intent to kill or harm is irrelevant.

    In criminal law, the attempted battery type of assault requires a Specific Intent to commit battery. An intent to frighten will not suffice for this form of assault.

    There can be no assault if the act does not produce a true apprehension of harm in the victim. There must be a reasonable fear of injury. The usual test applied is whether the act would induce such apprehension in the mind of a reasonable person. The status of the victim is taken into account. A threat made to a child might be sufficient to constitute an assault, while an identical threat made to an adult might not.

    Virtually all jurisdictions agree that the victim must be aware of the danger. This element is not required, however, for the attempted battery type of assault. A defendant who throws a rock at a sleeping victim can only be guilty of the attempted battery assault, since the victim would not be aware of the possible harm.

    link

  21. Pablo says:

    You can get a longer gander of the whole thing here.

    Your 2:58 is longer than my 2:58? ;)

    The police report said that Dance’s chief of staff, Michele Prumo, who was standing on the side of the auditorium, had asked the officer to walk over and calm Small down.

    They spelled “Shut him up.” wrong.

    However, Maryland education leaders say they are committed to going forward with the curriculum.

    Wait, I thought it was just a set of standards and not a centrally controlled curriculum. Someone must be confused.

  22. geoffb says:

    Cops know all the tricks. As security for the event he can remove anyone the event organizers say to remove. He can use his hands to force the removal if they won’t leave quietly. Doing so with shoves and invading personal space is to encourage/invite the person being removed to make contact at which point the handcuffs come out and the arrest is made.

    Quite basic, which doesn’t mean it was right but I’m more inclined to blame those who ordered the removal.

  23. sdferr says:

    It would be good to have the “softball” question session which had preceded Mr. Scott even arising, if only in order to have a clear sense of the substance (or perhaps, better, lack of substance) against which he was reacting. But has the videographer posted any of that? I haven’t run into it yet, if she(?) has.

  24. geoffb says:

    I suspect they expect that situation never to arise. –

    Correct.

    nr at 6:05. That is the law but when it is a policeman things are looked at differently. I’m not saying that is right to do but it is done.

  25. Pablo says:

    Quite basic, which doesn’t mean it was right but I’m more inclined to blame those who ordered the removal.

    There are two problems. The education Nazis are responsible for one of them. The lying thug cop culture is a separate one.

  26. newrouter says:

    the fun part is the whole incident is on video. less cop says perp says thing.

  27. LBascom says:

    “Doing so with shoves and invading personal space is to encourage/invite the person being removed to make contact at which point the handcuffs come out”

    Yeah, the asshole acted like he was dealing with an inmate in a prison yard, rather than a parent at a school Q& A.

    I think Shermlaw up there at 2:52 has it about right.

  28. Pablo says:

    sdferr, my understanding is that no live questions were being taken and that they were reading submitted questions so I don’t know that such video, if it exists, would be helpful. I suspect, and am clearly speculating, that the videographer noted that dude was breaking bad and started recording. Thus, that may be all of the video there is to be had.

  29. sdferr says:

    I think that’s a good guess Pablo. She posted only a :30 sec. clip when she shouts out “you didn’t read my question! Read all the questions!”, otherwise.

  30. Shermlaw says:

    If there’s an assault, it’s perpetrated by the security guy. And BTW, I don’t recall the “redress of grievances” part of our rights to be limited to pre-approved questions.

  31. newrouter says:

    maryland constitution

    Art. 6. That all persons invested with the Legislative or Executive powers of Government are the Trustees of the Public, and, as such, accountable for their conduct: Wherefore, whenever the ends of Government are perverted, and public liberty manifestly endangered, and all other means of redress are ineffectual, the People may, and of right ought, to reform the old, or establish a new Government; the doctrine of non-resistance against arbitrary power and oppression is absurd, slavish and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind.

    Art. 7. That the right of the People to participate in the Legislature is the best security of liberty and the foundation of all free Government; for this purpose, elections ought to be free and frequent; and every citizen having the qualifications prescribed by the Constitution, ought to have the right of suffrage (amended by Chapter 357, Acts of 1971, ratified Nov. 7, 1972).

    Art. 8. That the Legislative, Executive and Judicial powers of Government ought to be forever separate and distinct from each other; and no person exercising the functions of one of said Departments shall assume or discharge the duties of any other.

    Art. 9. That no power of suspending Laws or the execution of Laws, unless by, or derived from the Legislature, ought to be exercised, or allowed.

    Art. 10. That freedom of speech and debate, or proceedings in the Legislature, ought not to be impeached in any Court of Judicature.

    Art. 11. That Annapolis be the place of meeting of the Legislature; and the Legislature ought not to be convened, or held at any other place but from evident necessity.

    Art. 12. That for redress of grievances, and for amending, strengthening and preserving the Laws, the Legislature ought to be frequently convened.

    Art. 13. That every man hath a right to petition the Legislature for the redress of grievances in a peaceable and orderly manner.

    link

  32. cranky-d says:

    Another document that’s over 100 years old? Please.

  33. newrouter says:

    i like quaint stuff

  34. geoffb says:

    Forget it Jake, it’s Chinatown Baltimore.

  35. cranky-d says:

    Forget it, Jake, it’s Chinatown Baltimore America.

  36. LBascom says:

    America 2.0

  37. bour3 says:

    Yesterday I read a site that started with Norman Rockwell’s painting of Town Hall.

    And I did not like that.

    I don’t know why, I just didn’t. He said, the image of this guy being shoved out should be the new image for the new town hall for the new age and conservatives should really drive that.

    And I thought, you like that painting so much, then fine. Photoshop has filters all over the place, lets see how it can render it. They didn’t have a “Norman Rockwell” selection so I used “watercolor” instead, closest I could see and then fiddle with brush strokes and shadow emphasis and such.

    It also needed more heads in there, too much blank space so I took some of Rockwell’s and stuck ’em in there and here you go if you care to see wut I dun.

    And so you can see how all this dilly-dallying around can really slow a guy down with his reading.

  38. newrouter says:

    Open Meetings Compliance Board Complaint Procedures
    Filing a Complaint
    If you believe that a public body has violated the Act, you may file a complaint with the Open Meetings Compliance Board.
    The Board encourages members of the public who have questions about a public body’s compliance with the Act to pose their questions first to a member of the public body or its staff or counsel.
    1. How to file a Complaint
    ? Send a complaint letter by mail or e-mail to the Open Meetings Compliance Board at this address: Open Meetings Compliance Board, c/o Attorney General’s Office, 200 St. Paul Place, Baltimore, MD 21202, or OpenGov@oag.state.md.us. You must sign your complaint and include a return address. The Board accepts scanned signatures.
    ? Tell the Board what public body is involved, what happened, what the date was, and how you believe the public body violated the Act. You may include more than one meeting or issue in a single complaint. You may find it helpful, before you file a complaint, to look over the Open Meetings Act Manual or take the online course posted at http://www.igsr.umd.edu/VLC/OMA/class_oma_intro1.php.
    ? Please be as detailed as you can. Usually, the Board issues an opinion based solely on the information in the complaint and in the response from the public body. The more information the Board has, the more focused its opinion can be.
    ? Please identify any document that the public body might possess that you feel would assist the Board in the review, and, if it has been posted online, tell us where to find it.
    ? If you refer to live audio or video minutes, please specify the times of any segments relevant to your complaint.
    ? Please focus your complaint on violations of the Act. The Board only has jurisdiction over complaints about possible violations of the Open Meetings Act by public bodies. For example, the Board cannot address complaints that a public body wrongfully denied a Public Information Act request, that a private homeowner’s association met secretly, or that a public body made the wrong decision on a matter before it.

    link

  39. happyfeet says:

    Maryland is the fascist little fuckstate what ass-raped Linda Tripp after she exposed what a whore America’s herpes-ridden whore president was

    his name was Bill Clinton and now his cunt wife wants to be the next whore president after food stamp is my understanding, and the media way bad wants it too

    Maryland’s problems go far far far beyond education policies

  40. happyfeet says:

    mom and dad had a print of the rockwell lincoln town hall thing over the fireplace dad especially really liked that one

    i wasn’t super partial to it Rockwell reminds me of my dead grandma what died …. they always had a Rockwell coffee table book on their coffee table

    they lived in Arkansas and when they served dinner there was always sweet tea boiled potatoes and a plate of white bread on the table every time

  41. newrouter says:

    was the attacker a “black hispanic”?

  42. newrouter says:

    bleg- if law enforcement hires out “off duty” who is liable? when does private citizen becomes “police”? is this “law enforcement officer” in a jurisdiction that he assigned?

  43. newrouter says:

    bleg- do off duty police have plenary power and how so?

  44. newrouter says:

    bleg – if you’re off duty as a clerk can you instantaneously become a working police? if you are working for gov’t x as “security” can you change to working for gov’t y as police in an instant? does gov’t x have any liability for you functioning as an agent of gov’t y while working for x?

  45. newrouter says:

    Agency

    A consensual relationship created by contract or by law where one party, the principal, grants authority for another party, the agent, to act on behalf of and under the control of the principal to deal with a third party. An agency relationship is fiduciary in nature, and the actions and words of an agent exchanged with a third party bind the principal.

    An agreement creating an agency relationship may be express or implied, and both the agent and principal may be either an individual or an entity, such as a corporation or partnership.

    Under the law of agency, if a person is injured in a traffic accident with a delivery truck, the truck driver’s employer may be liable to the injured person even if the employer was not directly responsible for the accident. That is because the employer and the driver are in a relationship known as principal-agent, in which the driver, as the agent, is authorized to act on behalf of the employer, who is the principal.

    The law of agency allows one person to employ another to do her or his work, sell her or his goods, and acquire property on her or his behalf as if the employer were present and acting in person. The principal may authorize the agent to perform a variety of tasks or may restrict the agent to specific functions, but regardless of the amount, or scope, of authority given to the agent, the agent represents the principal and is subject to the principal’s control. More important, the principal is liable for the consequences of acts that the agent has been directed to perform.
    link

  46. BigBangHunter says:

    Pelosi: Obamacare Means Freedom to ‘Follow Your Passion’

    – Which is, of course, dog whistle Prog-speak for: “To all our dear basement dwelling video game enthusiasts, fear not, we have your back and we’re giving mommy and daddy one more reason not to have to boot your lazy ass out into mainstream life, (and don’t forget to vote big D at every opportunity.)”

  47. newrouter says:

    >He was being removed for not following format to ask questions and is charged with second-degree assault of police officer<

    link

    no the clown can’t be a “police officer” when in servitude to another. sue the effers for everything

  48. geoffb says:

    Another AP History Book (American Pageant) Distorts 2A
    […]
    The offending text re: the Second Amendment reads, “A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms (i.e. for military purposes) shall not be infringed.”

  49. Ø-Merica.

    How lovely it is….

    ThankX, Duh!1 & Oprah….

  50. cranky-d says:

    This is an ungodly hour to be awake with the intent of doing anything other than going back to bed.

    Being an adult sucks.

  51. Slartibartfast says:

    Maryland is the fascist little fuckstate what ass-raped Linda Tripp after she exposed what a whore America’s herpes-ridden whore president was

    his name was Bill Clinton and now his cunt wife wants to be the next whore president after food stamp is my understanding, and the media way bad wants it too

    Maryland’s problems go far far far beyond education policies.

    You’ve shown that you can sometimes find the shift key; now can you humor me and show us that it’s possible for you not to be a dick?

    Because right there, you were being a dick. I’m going to start pointing this out on a regular basis, because I suspect maybe you can’t tell. I encourage others to pitch in, on account of I can’t possibly keep up with hf’s diarrhetic volume.

  52. serr8d says:

    Why have a Townhall at all if spontaneity and open discourse isn’t on the menu?

    The issue here is that an elected Government body of elected Officials in these United States of America set up namby-pamby participation rules for their ‘open meeting’ that citizens must follow, else be thrown in jail.

    Crappy little Government and it’s ancillary bureaucrats behaving badly; secondarily, cops behaving badly. But the two are so intertwined that there’s no distinction anymore.

    We, citizens, are well and truly fucked. We can be arrested for any reason any petty shitheel Government official deems appropriate, even for asking questions at an ostensibly open Townhall forum.

  53. sdferr says:

    The rule of cattle requires that any violence and coercion goes one way: can’t be having the cows bossing the herdsman around, never could.

  54. serr8d says:

    Oh, and yes, Slart, you’re correct.

    I remember the first time I saw ‘feets here in PW, many years ago. He was enlightening, welcome, and brought a bit of spontaneity that was anfractuous but always appropriate. But, his demeanor has darkened over the years. Sad, really.

    Your vicious attacks, exemplified above, aren’t all that enlightening, ‘feets, and, now, your spontaneity isn’t as much anticipated and delightful as it is dreaded and undesirable.

  55. Pablo says:

    Beck will have the lady that shot the video on TV tonight. Mr. Small is exercising his right to remain silent, per his lawyer’s advice.

  56. StrangernFiction says:

    In the News: Moran tells AT’s readership to go fvck themselves.

  57. leigh says:

    I, too, used to really like happyfeet.

    What happened to him?

  58. leigh says:

    Cranky, good luck at the new job. May it suck less each day.

  59. FYI [FWIW]:

    From Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition:

    Assault. Any willful attempt or threat to inflict injury upon the person of another, when coupled with an apparent present ability so to do, and any intentional display of force such as would give the victim reason to fear or expect immediate bodily harm, constitutes an assault. An assault may be committed without actually touching, or striking, or doing bodily harm, to the person of another. State v. Murphy, 7 Wash.App. 505, 500P.2d 1276, 1281.

    Frequently used to describe illegal force which is technically a battery. For crime of assault victim need not be apprehensive of fear if the outward gesture is menacing and defendant intends to harm, though for tort of assault, element of victim’s apprehension is required. Com. v. Slaney, 345 Mass. 135, 185 N.E.2d 919.

    It is unlawful attempt to commit a battery. People v. Lopez, 271 C.A.2d 754, 77 Cal.Rptr. 59, 63.

    In some jurisdictions degrees of the offense are established
    as first, second and even third degree assault.

    See also Aggravated assault; Aggravated battery; Battery; Conditional assault; Felonious assault; Fresh complaint rule; Malicious assault with deadly weapon.

    Aggravated assault. One committed with the intention
    of committing some additional crime; or one attended
    with circumstances of peculiar outrage or atrocity. This
    class includes assault with a dangerous or deadly weapon
    (q. v.).

    A person is guilty of aggravated assault if he: (a) attempts to cause serious bodily injury to another, or causes such injury purposely, knowingly or recklessly under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human life; or (b) attempts to cause or purposely or knowingly causes bodily injury to another with a deadly weapon. Model Penal Code, § 211.1.

    Simple assault. An assault unaccompanied by any circumstances of aggravation. A person is guilty of simple
    assault if he (a) attempts to cause or purposely, knowingly
    or recklessly causes bodily injury to another; or (b)
    negligently causes bodily injury to another with a deadly
    weapon; or (c) attempts by physical menace to put
    another in fear of imminent serious bodily injury. Model
    Penal Code, § 211.1. An unlawful attempt coupled with present ability to commit violent injury on person of another. People v. Gholston, 164 Colo. 58, 432 P.2d 636, 637. See also Menace.

  60. sdferr says:

    Dance’s chief of staff, Michele Prumo . . .

    This lowly neatsherd Prumo, should be facing confrontation with Bossy the Cow every day of her working life from here on out, or preferably, with thousands of Bossy the Cows, right up in her fascist mug. May she find that she can scarcely move without stepping in another dungpat. She should learn — directly and personally — the implications of her desires, as should each of these grasping mini-tyrants who would seek to own the cattle.

  61. happyfeet says:

    Maryland didn’t literally ass-rape Linda Tripp that part was hyperbole they just raped her financially mostly

    in other news Maryland’s whore governor wants to be Hillary’s vice president which is not hyperbole it’s a for reals thing but my guess is she’ll pick somebody more hispanical

  62. Pablo says:

    What happened to him?

    Sarah Palin.

  63. happyfeet says:

    she’s a neo-populist icon I think

  64. sdferr says:

    Does the Clown Disaster count for a neo-pustulist?

  65. happyfeet says:

    he’s transcended abysmal that’s certain

    i can’t get over how unbelievably stagnant America has become

    suppuration would be the logical next step

  66. dicentra says:

    “suppuration” is a good word. I’ma keep it handy.

  67. sdferr says:

    Wonder when Pakistan gets around to changing its name to Carnajstan?

  68. Shermlaw says:

    Upon further contemplation of this incident, I would the following:

    In my jurisdiction, the Open Meetings law is construed liberally against the public entity conducting the meeting. That means, not only must the public be afforded the opportunity to participate, but that opportunity must be meaningful. To that end, if an entity has a meeting on one topic and invites public participation, one cannot limit that participation by requiring pre-approved questions or only allowing certain individuals to speak. The reason for this is obvious. There’s too much opportunity to game the system.

    During regular business meetings, the public should be given time to address concerns, but public participation may be limited because of other routine business. In such circumstances, however, individuals who desire to address an entity for a longer period, should be provided a time at a future meeting and placed on the agenda for that purpose. The reason for the agenda requirement, is that normally, all matters brought before the entity should be made public ahead of time, so that individuals may decide whether to show up.

    Bottom line: If this had happened in my state, there would be hell to pay, including fines for the individual board members plus attorneys fees and costs.

    What we have in Maryland, evidently, is simple tyranny.

  69. Pablo says:

    When you’re facing 10 years in prison for asking questions, yes, what you have is tyranny.

  70. Squid says:

    When you’re facing 10 years in prison for asking questions, yes, what you have is tyranny.

    The flip side of that formulation is that a populace denied peaceful means of pushing back against their government will eventually turn to other means. I hope our budding authoritarians will consider the ultimate consequence of disabling the relief valve on their local political pressure vessel.

  71. sdferr says:

    Michael Medved says that if denied peaceful means of pushing back, the best thing to do is surrender quietly.

  72. McGehee says:

    Paywall alert on the Medved link, or is the link bad?

  73. sdferr says:

    Links not bad, ya’s just have to use the workaround: copy-paste the headline into GoogleSearch and click the first link that pops up, which will take you to the full article.

  74. sdferr says:

    In the alternative, you can get more or less the same stomach turning result by looking at this Ricochet piece and its comments.

  75. sdferr says:

    Apologies, link to Richochet.

  76. mondamay says:

    All I needed ot read was the second headline about the “party of ‘no’ confirms its reputation”, to know I didn’t want to read any more. The pay wall saved me from higher blood pressure and additional acid reflux.

    Get this, GOP: You can be the party of NO, or you can be the party of NOthing. If you choose option B, don’t expect to be a party for long.

  77. dicentra says:

    Anyone who seeks to destroy corruption in Washington can expect vigorous and unprincipled pushback.

    They will NOT go quietly or be voted out by mere citizens.

  78. geoffb says:

    What we have in Maryland, evidently, is simple tyranny.

    Maintained everywhere by means old and foul.

    I hope our budding authoritarians will consider the ultimate consequence of disabling the relief valve on their local political pressure vessel.

    They have been considering it for some time now. Even campus police are getting into the act.

  79. leigh says:

    Judge Napalitano has been running a series on his FB page about police brutality. There isn’t a day that goes by that he doesn’t show some egregious act of police brutality. They range from tasering people at traffic stops to running them over.

  80. sdferr says:

    Brutality still carries the simple sense of acting like brutes, that is, the beasts who roam the earth distinct from human beings. But what is this difference between brute and human, if not seated in the human capacity to reason? So, acting the brute isn’t quite as simple as acting with violence, but brings instead the implication of willingness to act without reason. So with the unreasoning Balt. Co. cop. He doesn’t stop to bother himself to think.

  81. McGehee says:

    Medved is of the “choose your battles” school that has wrecked the country and the Republican Party.

    I reiterate, for his edification and anyone else’s who needs it: You have to earn the privilege of choosing your battles by winning battles you don’t have the luxury of NOT choosing.

    This is one they don’t have the luxury of not choosing.

  82. sdferr says:

    *** State’s Attorney Scott Shellenberger told WBAL Radio that it was “clear that Mr. Small violated the rules of the meeting and disrupted the meeting.” Further, Shellenberger defended the arrest and resulting charges.

    “It was also clear that the Officer acted appropriately and did have probable cause to make an arrest on both charges,” he added. “The Baltimore County State’s Attorney’s Office has just received and reviewed the facts of this case. In the interest of justice, further prosecution will not accomplish anything more. Therefore, the charges have been dismissed.” ***

    So the pretense of propriety is preserved. By lying.

  83. McGehee says:

    The process was punishment enough.

    This time.

  84. geoffb says:

    From what I’ve seen of Maryland justice in the various Brett K. affairs it is all predicated on lies which are used to gain the required by the “Party.” verdicts.

    A dismissal like this means that the lies wouldn’t have held up and rather than take the chance that the system might get called into question publicly they dropped charges to make that possibility go away.

    Like someone who threatens a lawsuit but withdraws when aggressively taken up on the threat because a trial means “discovery” under oath.

  85. palaeomerus says:

    “I reiterate, for his edification and anyone else’s who needs it: You have to earn the privilege of choosing your battles by winning battles you don’t have the luxury of NOT choosing.”

    Yes, a master of wuss-fu is a master of nothing but obfuscation and submission which even a young cat can easily master. And if a cat can do your job…

  86. palaeomerus says:

    Sounds like a real lawyer shook the book and Assault dad’s name fell off the page…this time. (And next time too if a real lawyer gets involved.)

  87. McGehee says:

    I’ve got a four-month-old cat that has demonstrated a better understanding of tactical advantage than almost anyone in Congress…

  88. leigh says:

    Cats learn early that other cats mean potential ass-whoopin’. It’s either get tough or say good night.

Comments are closed.