Can A “Top Cop” Effectively Lead The Country If She Hollers ‘Hate Crime’ Before An Investigation Has Been Completed? (UPDATE ADDED)
[guest post by Dana]
Here we go. I haven’t posted about this subject for obvious reasons. The main one being that the Jussie Smollett case is still being investigated and we don’t know for sure what happened. So while I’ve stayed on the sidelines keeping my mouth shut and not jumping to conclusions, the leading Democratic candidates didn’t realize that they too should show some restraint and patience and wait for an investigation before spouting off. Obviously the reason we wait is because investigations into high-voltage incidents like the alleged Smollett attack can reveal that what the situation appeared to be, was in fact something very different. No caution for this group though. Heck no. They happily jumped into the sordid mess with both feet in an effort to advance themselves like the grifters they are. As they self-righteously beat their chests in angry indignation at the horrible stench of assumed racist hate wafting through the air, they made their assumptions based on seemingly little more than an initial report of the incident. Certainly they reacted before there was even an opportunity for an investigation to take place. (Date of alleged incident: Jan. 29. Date of the three candidates’ tweets: Jan. 29.) But sadly, the assumptions they made were necessary if they were going to out-woke the competition. And yet, while grifters are gonna grift, when a candidate for the highest office in the land, who spent six years as “California’s top cop,” still cannot resist the urge to make hasty, premature accusations about an alleged hate crime, as well as effectively announcing that she *knew* what happened – even before any investigation – then the seriousness of that individual who hopes to become the next Commander in Chief should be in question. I’m looking at you, Kamala Harris. It’s almost as if investigations, facts, and evidence are pesky mundane issues to be swatted away because girl wants to become the president, and pushing one’s cause, no matter how premature or inaccurate, is the path to a needed win. As caution and prudence go out the window, a foolish mentality of “strike while the iron is hot or forever lose that woke opportunity” becomes the guiding light for the self-proclaimed “top cop”. Maybe it’s just me, but shouldn’t we expect more of a presidential candidate who has been a state’s chief law enforcement officer and top lawyer for six years in one of the nation’s most populous states?
Anyway, the police want to interview Smollett again after two brothers who were interviewed by investigators claimed that they were paid [by Smollett] to take part in a staged attack.
P.S. No response from Kamala Harris or Kirsten Gillibrand on the changing tide of the story. Cory Booker, while not acknowledging his earlier rush to judgment, said today that he is now going to withhold from commenting further “until all the information actually comes out from on the record sources.”
Gosh, what a novel idea.
UPDATE: This is Kamala Harris responding to a reporter’s inquiry today about whether she had been too quick to condemn the “attack” before knowing all the facts:
Kamala Harris looks deeply uncomfortable and/or deeply confused about having to explain her Jussie Smollett “modern-day lynching” tweet. pic.twitter.com/Z2EMvm2HZB
— Vince Coglianese (@TheDCVince) February 18, 2019
“I think that once the investigation is concluded, then we should all comment, but I’m not going to comment until I know the outcome of that investigation.”
Uh, too late. You already did. Remember??? Unfortunately, the reporter did not hold her feet to the fire and point out that, of all people, the former San Francisco District Attorney and Attorney General should have known to use a prudent restraint before claiming that a “modern day lynching” had taken place prior to any investigation having been completed.
(Cross-posted at The Jury Talks Back.)