Oh wait! There was evidence that the report you just cited was incorrect. You can even hear the call the call for yourself.

 

911 caller in Gates case contradicts cop - US news - Life - Race & ethnicity | NBC News

 

 

Let's keep going if you'd like to keep defending the rest of the report when it's been proven that the officer misattributed key elements of the caller's statement to that very report.

 

 

"A police report said the caller described the possible burglars as "two black males with backpacks" — leading some commentators to vilify the caller as racist since it turned out Gates was entering his own home.

 

But the 911 recording released by police showed that Lucia Whalen never said two black men were involved. She did not describe their race, acknowledged they might just be having a hard time with the door and said she saw two suitcases on the porch."

 

 

Gee, if the officer making the report would like about that, wonder what else he might lie about?

For a guy who likes to point out 'fallacies' the first bolded sentence of yours is quite an either or.

 

I think we all know that there was definitely a racial issue in the Gates case, but the overarching issue was that someone, especially someone so accomplished, was arrested in their own home.

He was arrested after breaking into his own home after a neighbor reported seeing two men with backpacks trying to break in. Even then, the only reason that he was arrested was that he followed an officer outside and continued to harass him.

 

Finally, I'm not the biggest fan of Obama, but many of the things that the rest of your statements throughout this thread apply to all parties.

Give yourself some credit. You may not be Obama's biggest fan, but you more than hold your own in that arena.

 

I do not care at all to admit that I am strongly opposed to nearly every policy that Obama has ever proposed. I have also been a vocal critic of Republican leaders, including Boehner, Cantor, Reid, and many others. Call me partisan if you want, but I rarely see you strong Obama fans do anything but defend Obama's failed policies. Obama and the leadership of both parties have greatly accelerated the decline of this country over the past 6 years. Obama and his enablers deserve no fans.

 

If someone from the DOJ was arrested in Mexico, do you really think that ANY President wouldn't be doing something about it?

Did I say or imply otherwise? My point was that the Mexican government could make a very strong case against Holder and the others who were responsible for flooding Mexico with illegal weapons. Dozens of Mexicans have died thanks to those weapons and a U.S. Border agent was also killed with one of them. However, the Marine sitting in a Mexican prison is an American who has done much more to earn the respect and gratitude of this country than Eric Holder and his staff have and the imprisoned Marine has no Mexican blood on his hands.

Ok. I'm sure a police officer is going to put, "after showing me his ID, he immediately requested my badge number, but I didn't give it to him."

 

I'm also going to assume that a Harvard professor in Gates case whose embarrassed/angered by someone trying to arrest him for breaking into his own home is going to know he can request his badge number and knows it's legal.

 

I'm sure the police arrested him, later found out who he was, and made sure he had every t crossed and i dotted in his report.

 

Maybe you are the kind of person who thinks that an officer has never lied or exaggerated in a report, especially when their head might be on the line. I'm not saying all do, just that it isn't really something outside the realm of possibility.

Am I correct in reading your response that you still have not bothered to acquaint yourself with the facts of the Gates case, or did you read the police report and just assume that both policeman lied about what happened?

Oh wait! There was evidence that the report you just cited was incorrect. You can even hear the call the call for yourself.

 

911 caller in Gates case contradicts cop - US news - Life - Race & ethnicity | NBC News

 

 

Let's keep going if you'd like to keep defending the rest of the report when it's been proven that the officer misattributed key elements of the caller's statement to that very report.

 

 

"A police report said the caller described the possible burglars as "two black males with backpacks" — leading some commentators to vilify the caller as racist since it turned out Gates was entering his own home.

 

But the 911 recording released by police showed that Lucia Whalen never said two black men were involved. She did not describe their race, acknowledged they might just be having a hard time with the door and said she saw two suitcases on the porch."

 

 

Gee, if the officer making the report would like about that, wonder what else he might lie about?

I encourage everybody who has an open mind to read both the police report and what you posted above and decide for themselves who the partisan is in this debate. The transcript does not contradict anything in the police report despite the misleading headline that you linked.

 

The police report was a summary and it says that the caller said that she saw two black men with backpacks trying to break into the house. That was exactly what she saw, but her objection was that it was not included verbatim in the police report. What was missing was that the dispatcher asked for a physical description, to which she responded.

 

(Recall that NBC edited the 911 recording in the Trayvon Martin case to make Zimmerman sound like a racist because it fit their narrative. The MSNBC/NBC news department is not known for objective reporting or professionalism.)

Am I correct in reading your response that you still have not bothered to acquaint yourself with the facts of the Gates case, or did you read the police report and just assume that both policeman lied about what happened?

 

I think you are the one who is mistaken.

 

You cited a link to the report, which was only the officer's account.

 

I cited a link to the 911 call, and a news article that clearly explains how the officer who prepared the report contradicted what the witness herself said, as proven by the report (which you linked) and the 911 call (which I linked).

 

This is pretty strong evidence that would lead one to call the entirety of the report into question.

 

Thank you for your concern though, I just graduated law school, so I feel that I can take the legal issues on my own from there and I'll gladly eat crow if I am wrong.

 

 

 

Finally, I think there are plenty of things people can validly criticize Obama for. I don't think that the Gates case is one of them.

I think you are the one who is mistaken.

 

You cited a link to the report, which was only the officer's account.

 

I cited a link to the 911 call, and a news article that clearly explains how the officer who prepared the report contradicted what the witness herself said, as proven by the report (which you linked) and the 911 call (which I linked).

 

This is pretty strong evidence that would lead one to call the entirety of the report into question.

 

Thank you for your concern though, I just graduated law school, so I feel that I can take the legal issues on my own from there and I'll gladly eat crow if I am wrong.

 

 

 

Finally, I think there are plenty of things people can validly criticize Obama for. I don't think that the Gates case is one of them.

I think that objective people can read the police report and the NBC claim that it is inaccurate and decide for themselves which is more credible.

 

IMO, if you cannot criticize Obama for playing the race card in the Gates case, I do not expect to see you criticize him for much of anything else. Maybe we can agree on how ridiculous Obama looks throwing a baseball.

I think that objective people can read the police report and the NBC claim that it is inaccurate and decide for themselves which is more credible.

 

IMO, if you cannot criticize Obama for playing the race card in the Gates case, I do not expect to see you criticize him for much of anything else. Maybe we can agree on how ridiculous Obama looks throwing a baseball.

 

 

And I think most objective people would actually read the report they link (that starts on page 1), listen to the tape of the 911 call itself, and take the defendant's denial wherein she takes a position that is entirely consistent with her recorded call into account, but everyone isn't always objective. Most would probably find these kind of things lessen credibility of the report as a whole.

 

Again, just for clarity, the report you linked said, "She went on to tell me she observed two black males". Who see that in page 1 of the report (remember, the one that you linked), had misappropriated a statement to a witness (the witness whose call launched the investigation, remember). Uhhhmm.... that's kind of a big deal considering.

 

Again, the witness' own statements and her recorded 911 call say she didn't know the race of the men, but that they could have been Hispanic. Again, the witness later says she never told the police she said that what they had stated as such in their report, and the 911 call she made is entirely consistent with that. That's not what is in the report. She says she never the statement that appears in the report to the police. If you don't think it's potentially a big deal when a witness comes out and says that they didn't tell the police things that appear in a report, things get a little fishy.

 

There doesn't really seem to be a very logical reason why she'd say their race was unknown, but maybe Hispanic during the call, then change her mind and say (in a very definitive way) that they were black to the officer.

 

There are a few reasons I can think of why for an officer who is probably preparing his report at a much later time might see what kind of "storm" has been brought about by everything and fudge his report some to make it better.

 

 

 

Here's what most with common sense would see as a better outcome:

 

- 911 receives a call, officer says she sees two people, unknown race but possibly Hispanic.

 

- Police go to check it out.

 

- Officer comes to the door, finds that the "suspect" is black, a distinguished Harvard professor, and in his own home.

 

- The officer has the common sense understanding to realize why he might be a little upset, lets a smart remark (though one that isn't illegal) roll off his back and goes on. Being rude isn't a crime.

 

- Gates: I'd like your badge #.

 

- Officer: Sure, it's #--------. I was just here for your safety in response to reports of a crime, but if you'd like, you are welcome to file a complaint. I'll give you the office's #. It's (000) 000-0000.

 

Both parties go on their way. If Gates files a frivolous complaint after that, he looks like a fool for doing so and it's quickly dismissed and his reputation suffers.

I did not say that race has been discussed with regard to every scandal. I said when a news of another new scandal breaks, Obama speaks about race. What I meant by that statement is that Obama and his administration uses race to dilute media coverage of his many scandals and policy failures.

 

While the VA scandal was grabbing national attention, the Obama administration was talking about segregation, Donald Sterling, and the Washington Redskins' supposedly racist name (his surrogate Harry Reid led that effort).

 

The timing of Obama's periodic decisions to start national discussions on race is not coincidental. The blame Bush strategy worked for quite awhile but even his lapdog media grew tired of his whining. Now it seems the race card is also losing its effectiveness. Like bacteria treated by the same antibiotics for years, the media finally seems to becoming a bit resistant to Obama's treatments.

 

Obama and John Kerry sorely need a diplomatic win to snap long losing streaks and springing one of Obama's Marine corpsmen from a Mexican prison just might fit the bill. If Kerry cannot do this small job, then maybe he should call in Jimmy Carter to do it for him.

 

So your initial claim of "when a scandal occurs he talks about race" isn't correct.

 

So have their been ANY scandals that somehow evolved into race?

 

Gates a)isn't a scandal and b)was about race from the beginning according to Mr Gates so the POTUS didn't MAKE it about race.

 

What scandals has the administration turned into a race issue? Discussed race?

So your initial claim of "when a scandal occurs he talks about race" isn't correct.

 

So have their been ANY scandals that somehow evolved into race?

 

Gates a)isn't a scandal and b)was about race from the beginning according to Mr Gates so the POTUS didn't MAKE it about race.

 

What scandals has the administration turned into a race issue? Discussed race?

Gates assumed that the police were racist as soon as they asked him to establish that he belonged in the house that a witness had reported seeing him break into. Obama assumed that the policemen were racist because Gates was black, a friend, and claimed that he had been targeted because he was black. Obama turned the incident into a "teachable moment" for the nation because he sided with Gates without knowing the facts. The incident was only about race because Gates and Obama made it about race.

 

The Beer Summit was a farce and one of many examples of Obama's misuse of the bully pulpit. The incident involving Gates was not one that required presidential intervention.

 

Please pay attention. I did not say that Obama has turned every scandal into an issue involving race. That is what you claim that I said. What I said is that Obama using race to divert attention from scandals. The difference in what I am saying and your mischaracterization of my position is not that difficult to grasp if you try.

 

It is fine that you disagree with my position, just stop misstating it.

Edited May 25, 201412 yr by Mitch Rapp

I think this topic has got way off track. It took its usual turn a select few take a certain side to defend Obama and a select few attack Obama.The story here is a Marine who defended all of our freedoms made a simple mistake and has now been locked up in a foreign prison and has been assaulted repeatedly. As a nation we should demand the release of one of our heroes and not take no as an answer from a country to the south who owes its existence right now to our financial support.

^ BUT, what about the 2 dozen or so other U.S. citizens that are arrested in Mexico on the same charge every month, making an honest mistake? No love for them? The Marine was not on a "mission". Do we say the hell with the others since they were not an active armed forces member?

And I think most objective people would actually read the report they link (that starts on page 1), listen to the tape of the 911 call itself, and take the defendant's denial wherein she takes a position that is entirely consistent with her recorded call into account, but everyone isn't always objective. Most would probably find these kind of things lessen credibility of the report as a whole.

 

Again, just for clarity, the report you linked said, "She went on to tell me she observed two black males". Who see that in page 1 of the report (remember, the one that you linked), had misappropriated a statement to a witness (the witness whose call launched the investigation, remember). Uhhhmm.... that's kind of a big deal considering.

 

Again, the witness' own statements and her recorded 911 call say she didn't know the race of the men, but that they could have been Hispanic. Again, the witness later says she never told the police she said that what they had stated as such in their report, and the 911 call she made is entirely consistent with that. That's not what is in the report. She says she never the statement that appears in the report to the police. If you don't think it's potentially a big deal when a witness comes out and says that they didn't tell the police things that appear in a report, things get a little fishy.

 

There doesn't really seem to be a very logical reason why she'd say their race was unknown, but maybe Hispanic during the call, then change her mind and say (in a very definitive way) that they were black to the officer.

 

There are a few reasons I can think of why for an officer who is probably preparing his report at a much later time might see what kind of "storm" has been brought about by everything and fudge his report some to make it better.

 

 

 

Here's what most with common sense would see as a better outcome:

 

- 911 receives a call, officer says she sees two people, unknown race but possibly Hispanic.

 

- Police go to check it out.

 

- Officer comes to the door, finds that the "suspect" is black, a distinguished Harvard professor, and in his own home.

 

- The officer has the common sense understanding to realize why he might be a little upset, lets a smart remark (though one that isn't illegal) roll off his back and goes on. Being rude isn't a crime.

 

- Gates: I'd like your badge #.

 

- Officer: Sure, it's #--------. I was just here for your safety in response to reports of a crime, but if you'd like, you are welcome to file a complaint. I'll give you the office's #. It's (000) 000-0000.

 

Both parties go on their way. If Gates files a frivolous complaint after that, he looks like a fool for doing so and it's quickly dismissed and his reputation suffers.

You are ignoring one key fact in this case. According to the article to which you linked: "A police report said the caller described the possible burglars as 'two black males with backpacks' — leading some commentators to vilify the caller as racist since it turned out Gates was entering his own home."

 

Think about that. Two black men make a forced entry into a house and a policeman reports that a witness described the two men as being black when he met her on the scene. When that report becomes public, the woman who reported the incident learns that "some commentators" have branded her a racist.

 

Yet, you assume that the policeman lied because there was no motivation for the woman to claim that she had not mentioned the two men's race. Really? The woman, many of whose friends and neighbors were undoubtedly following what was made into a national story, watched as she was unfairly branded as a racist.

 

The first officer arrived on the scene in broad daylight at 12:44 PM. What motivation did he have to falsely claim that the woman accurately described the two men? What motivation did the woman have to change her story after being branded a racist on national TV?

 

The anti-police bias on the part of liberals amazes me sometimes. Eyewitness accounts of the same event often do not match but when a policeman is involved, liberals are too quick to assume the worst in cops. Maybe the policeman's report was wrong in this case but I don't see how he stood to gain anything by deliberately falsifying it in the manner that you have suggestion.

 

One last comment. Please recall that it was NBC's news department that edited out a dispatcher's question in a 911 recording to make George Zimmerman appear to be a racist. Any idea which of the "commentators" mentioned in the NBC article might have mischaracterized Lucia Whalen as a racist?

^ BUT, what about the 2 dozen or so other U.S. citizens that are arrested in Mexico on the same charge every month, making an honest mistake? No love for them? The Marine was not on a "mission". Do we say the hell with the others since they were not an active armed forces member?

You keep making this claim but I have seen nothing to substantiate it. So, is your claim that two dozen or so U.S. citizens are arrested at the border as the result of taking a wrong turn on San Diego freeway every month because I find that very hard to believe.

 

I can believe that a couple dozen Americans are arrested for firearms possession in Mexico every week, but not under similar circumstances to this Marine.

I think this topic has got way off track. It took its usual turn a select few take a certain side to defend Obama and a select few attack Obama.The story here is a Marine who defended all of our freedoms made a simple mistake and has now been locked up in a foreign prison and has been assaulted repeatedly. As a nation we should demand the release of one of our heroes and not take no as an answer from a country to the south who owes its existence right now to our financial support.

I agree that this thread has gotten way off track but when you say "As a nation we should demand the release of one of our heroes," the Mexican government cares nothing about our opinions as individual citizens.

 

This matter should have been handled quickly and quietly by our State Department and when that did not happen, President Obama should have made a private call to his Mexican counterpart. If that has been done and the Mexican government is still refusing to budge, then maybe it is time for the administration rethink its position on border security and so-called "immigration reform."

 

You may not like it, but the fact that this Marine has been in a Mexican prison since early April does reflect badly on his commander-in-chief.

All the Obama administration wants to do when a scandal breaks is discuss race. .

 

 

 

 

Please pay attention. I did not say that Obama has turned every scandal into an issue involving race. That is what you claim that I said. .

 

My initial response was to your claim. I didn't put words into your mouth. I still do not see where the POTUS uses race to divert attention from scandals. You call the Gates issue a scandal. It doesn't qualify as a scandal.

 

Benghazi is a scandal.

VA is a scandal.

Arms into Mexico is a scandal.

 

Did he use race in any of those?