CBS Report Calls Assault on Rand Paul a "Fight"

Just watched a CBS report on the assault of Rand Paul by his neighbor, Rene Boucher.  The police are still investigating but discovered enough evidence to charge Mr. Boucher with 4th degree misdemeanor assault. That carries a possible prison sentence of up to one year. Crimes that result in a prison sentence of more than one year are classed a felonies.  According to a Kentucky state police officer interviewed about the case, the charges could be elevated to a felony if, after the investigation is complete, the crime warrants it.

Rene Boucher is out of jail on a low $7500 bail.  That's reasonable; the wealthy neighbor of Mr. Paul is not a flight risk.  Mr. Boucher, under U.S. law. is innocent until proven guilty.

 Rand Paul is far from my favorite congressman but I think he deserves to be treated as well as Boucher, the alleged perpetrator of a crime.  Being treated fairly means not having the media behaving like the defense attorney for Mr. Boucher  who, as a wealthy physician, has hired the very best.  The unfair treatment I speak of is, in their TV broadcast, calling the attack on Mr. Paul "a fight."

It may appear a small distinction but it's not. A fight assumes that Mr. Paul was an active participant before the facts of his injury.  We don't know that.  Nowhere is that reported except in the broadcast by CBS.  CBS cites their sources of a "fight" as being the neighbors.  It may be appropriate to report the opinions of neighbors in a news piece but not as an absolute fact. This is what CBS has done.  It has not said "alleged fight." It has absolutely stated there was a fight.

Being attacked from behind while sitting on a lawnmower (the police version of an action resulting in a charge of 4th Degree Assault) is not a fight.  If you or any other person is attacked from behind at a subway station or anywhere else, would CBS call that a fight too.  Let me answer that for you. They wouldn't.

To be quite honest, Rand Paul pisses me off with what I view has his obstructionist tactics.  But unless it's proven there was " a fight," he should be fairly treated, especially by a major news organization which leans to one side, and may be gratified by neighborhood gossip about a dispute over lawn care.

Virginia Company Gives Employee the Finger

The Guardian, a left-leaning British newspaper, is up in arms about a Virginia woman fired from her job with a marketing/communications company doing business with the federal government.    Juli Briskman was riding her bicycle when Donald Trump’s presidential motorcade passed her by.  Unwilling to forgo a missed opportunity to express her political views, Ms. Briskman gave the president her middle finger.  A photographer with the presidential motorcade saw her little act of protest, took a picture and posted it on the internet.   Freedom of expression all around!   This is good right? 1^st Amendment! 

 But when Akima LLC, the government contractor company she works for exercised its own right of free speech  and gave her the finger, The Guardian seems to think it’s an outrage.  No,  the 1^st Amendment applies to everyone equally.   Screw you Juli Briskman and your sense of privilege and entitlement.   You know how it works, don’t you?

You live in an area where few Americans can afford to live and work.  You are well paid by a company which does contract work with our government.  Your company needs those contracts in order to pay you.  When they seek such contracts they ensure your employer (the taxpayer) that the company will represent the hiring party in the best way possible. The best way possible does not include a rump-heavy employee   lumbering along on her bicycle beside a presidential motorcade   giving an American president the finger.   

If the government were looking to hire a plumber, would they hire the plumber who gets their attention with an obscene gesture?  At least a plumber being fired for making an obscene gesture at an American president would understand why he/she was fired. Ms. Briskman seems to think that she can defecate where she eats and be applauded for it.

What is it about you that thinks your company should continue to pay you for hurting their business?  And do  you think the Office of Management and Budget will want to hire an entire phalanx of people like you to represent them? Do you think   using the viral picture as your icon on social media is a badge of honor?   And how did you manage now to block that image from social media?  You did it. You should own it.

But now you’re fired!  The taxpayers have given you the finger. That’s their right of free speech.  They are okay with the fact you don’t like the president or his policies. Just don’t make them pay public money for your elitist sense of entitlement. Where is your integrity?  Did Akima not ask you to further their business objectives?  Why did you take money from a governmental administration you are so vehemently opposed to anyway?

Perhaps when you find that job you say you’re looking for with Planned Parenthood or PETA, you will be sensible enough not to march outside with signs or obscene gestures protesting the organization’s mission.