In which the government runs down and injures an opposition journalist, has the local authorities (under ultimate federal control) cite him for a crime, and then stonewalls on questions.
OK, do I think he was targeted? No.
Do I think that this is massive ass covering and abuse of power? Absolutely.
Soja has the run-down…so to speak.
No, he just has a copy of the article Rand linked to. (And he didn’t notice the explanation of what the DC authors put in the QUESTIONS and ANSWERS sections, either.)
But, it is necessary to keep in mind that they will not, cannot stop, if they are transporting someone of high rank or otherwise involved in nat’l security operations. Otherwise, bad guys could use it as a ploy to make the vehicle an easy target.
“But, it is necessary to keep in mind that they will not, cannot stop, if they are transporting someone of high rank or otherwise involved in nat’l security operations.”
From a human factors point of view, that could be the solution right there. An operator gets used to certain things (i.e., being immune to certain normal traffic laws when in a State vehicle) and then does not make the adjustment when that situation no longer applies (i.e., being used to barreling through, he barrels through in an inappropriate situation).
As far as the citation–clear governmental abuse of power. And with all due respect to the idea of police as citizen protectors, if they can’t stand up to the powers that be, they need to resign.
This needs to be investigated to insure there is also not a political grudge match angle. Probably isn’t, but still needs to be investigated. Obviously, not by the D.C. police, as they have already shown they work for the politicos, not the law.
So, carrying someone “important” gives them the authority to run over pedestrians and then cite the pedestrians for it?
I understand they have to be careful but there must also be accountability. No one should be above the law, not even a government employee carrying someone “important.”
Whose hooker was he transporting?
Insert (heh) Bill Clinton joke here.
But, it is necessary to keep in mind that they will not, cannot stop, if they are transporting someone of high rank or otherwise involved in nat’l security operations. Otherwise, bad guys could use it as a ploy to make the vehicle an easy target.
Other than in Hollywood, exactly where and has any such incident ever occurred in this country? Oh, right, we need to apply the “precautionary principle”, especially when it benefits our masters.
“But, it is necessary to keep in mind that they will not, cannot stop, if they are transporting someone of high rank or otherwise involved in nat’l security operations.”
That’s irrelevant, since the driver stopped, got out of the vehicle and called Treacher’s office. He did not tell anyone at the scene that he was the driver, refused to identify himself and left the scene.
I find it particularly disturbing that Treacher was served with a jaywalking ticket for a location blocks away from the accident. I’ve had occasion to point out a vehicle that had just run a red light and almost hit me to a Cambridge cop, who explained that he hadn’t been watching and couldn’t issue a ticket unless he had personally witnessed the incident.
“I find it particularly disturbing that Treacher was served with a jaywalking ticket for a location blocks away from the accident. I’ve had occasion to point out a vehicle that had just run a red light and almost hit me to a Cambridge cop, who explained that he hadn’t been watching and couldn’t issue a ticket unless he had personally witnessed the incident.”
That’s one of the real problems here. That cop may have had a sheepish look on his face, but at the end of the day it is hard to conclude anything other than that he willingly served as a de facto “enforcer” for the Establishment mob. The fact there was another person doing damage control for the Establishment (whomever and whatever that “Establishment” might be) serves to underscore there is a serious law and order issue here–we might as well start calling this the Ancien Regime if this is how “commoners” can expect to deal with the govermental “nobility”.
My personal understanding was that of all the traffic incidents you could be involved in, “hit and run” was the most egregious, and viewed particularly unfavorably by the police–so as to cut down on the number of them. But apparently in D.C., they are encouraged so as to 1.)either help governmental agencies avoid embarassment, or b.) teach political enemies a lesson. I mention b.) because, Mr. Simberg’s comments to the contrary, intentional political intimidation is something that needs to be at least considered (as stupid as it might sound against someone like Jim Treacher, who, no offense, is not a mighty player on the stage. I think.) This is because the bogus jaywalking ticket is indicative of a coverup. Doesn’t mean that this entire incident is a dark plot–simple stupidity coupled with cupidity and lack of police integrity explains it also–merely that is must be considered, because if it is happening then saying it is not happening is a good way to ensure that is continues. Whereas looking at it and saying it might have been political initmidation a.) provides incentive for the authorities, in these routine cases, not to tip the scales of common justice in favor of other governmental personages, lest they be accused of fascist-like motives, and b.) reduces the ability of those wishing to use “brown-shirt” tactics on the sly to do so, since the guard will always be up on the part of the citizenry. For as Franklin said, we have a Republic–if we can keep it. And we keep it by soberly and judiciously looking at incidents like this and considering whether darker motives were at play–without necessarily concluding they are.
At any rate, the Washington D.C. police owe Mr. Medlock an apology–and an independent investigation.
And an arrest for hit and run of a certain State Department employee.
You know there are a couple of people, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, who could settle this problem really fast. After all, you are responsible for what the people working for you do.