Discussion: Megyn Kelly Asks If It's 'Appropriate' For Chicago Protester To Stare At Cop

TPM Article Topics
1

Discussion for article #243183

2

It absolutely sounds like Megyn Kelley is just about to say “Doesn’t he know his place?”

45 Likes
3

I wish these protestors would do what Megyn Kelly, Sara Palin, Rupert Murdoch’s masseuse and all the blonder, blond and other journalists at Foxy News want them to do.

4 Likes
4

Eye contact with the police is the new “hoodie” now I guess?

WTF is wrong with these people? If you can’t handle being stared at in anger then you have no business being a cop, and if you don’t understand that staring angrily down at a police force that you think wants to kill you is an important part of democracy, then you have no business having a national TV show.

54 Likes
5

According to the right wing, the only appropriate response for the protestor would be to stare at his shoes and say, “Yes, massa”

27 Likes
6

Conversely, why does the cop have to stare at the protester? Either person wants to keep aware for their safety but for the cop to stare is to provoke as well. Not that bubble-headed blonde Megyn would think of anything else but that a black person is at fault.

25 Likes
7

Gee Megyn, stop being an old shrew - try to be just a tiny bit cerebral - it is a peaceful non-violent interaction - who knows, maybe something positive will come out of it - research (oooh scary science stuff) would indicate it could build bonds -

3 Likes
8

Yeah look at him Kelly,hes staring not spitting,cursing,swinging at the cop just staring.And Bernard Kerick of all people to turn to.I know he was probably in PC when he was doing his time,he’s got a lot of nerve.

7 Likes
9

Well that’s very PC of Ms. Kelly - from the channel that abhors political correctness. So the young black man doesn’t “look right” in the face of authority. Doubt she has much concept of what young black men in this or many other cities have to put up with from police just to survive and maintain their dignity. Blow it out your hypocritical, privileged arse twit.

7 Likes
10

THIS GUY presumes to pass judgment on proper behavior?

On June 30, 2006, after an 18-month investigation conducted by the Bronx District Attorney's Office, ***Kerik pleaded guilty via a sworn statement in open court to two ethics violations*** (unclassified misdemeanors) and was ordered to pay $221,000 in fines at the 10-minute hearing. Kerik acknowledged that he ***failed to document a personal loan*** on his annual New York City conflict-of-interest Report (a violation of the New York City administrative code) and ***accepting a gift from a New Jersey construction firm attempting to do business with the city (a violation of the New York City Charter).***

On November 8, 2007, in White Plains, New York, Kerik was indicted by a federal grand jury on charges of conspiracy, tax fraud, and making false statements. Prosecutors say ***Kerik received about $255,000 in renovations to his Riverdale, Bronx, apartment from a company seeking to do business with the city of New York and concealed the income from the Internal Revenue Service.*** The indictment also charged that ***Kerik made several false statements to the White House (in his background information statement regarding his Department of Homeland Security appointment)*** and other federal officials. If convicted on all 16 counts in the indictment, Kerik could have faced a maximum sentence of 142 years in prison and $4.7 million in fines. He was released upon payment of a $500,000 bond. The New York charges were dropped in December 2008, but he was indicted in a separate Washington, D.C., action because that is where the crimes occurred.

***On October 20, 2009, Kerik's bail was revoked after he allegedly disclosed information that was under seal.*** He was remanded to the Westchester County Department of Corrections jail in Valhalla, New York, which has a section reserved for federal prisoners.]

***On November 5, 2009, Kerik pleaded guilty to eight felony tax and false statement charges***, and surrendered at the U.S. minimum security prison camp in Cumberland, Maryland, on May 17, 2010. He was discharged from federal custody on October 15, 2013, after serving 5 months home confinement. Bernard Kerik is serving additional penalty of three years probation (Federal Supervised Release) and ***current owes the USA over $180,000 criminal restitution*** on which he pays $1000/monthly.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernard_Kerik
30 Likes
11

Former New York City police Commissioner Bernard Kerik told Kelly, “Listen, you’re going to have guys like this. You know, they want to instigate.”

and its the cop’s job to not fall for it.

“But Richard look at him,” Kelly responded. "This is a cop out there accused of doing nothing wrong, trying to keep the peace."

as long as that kid is doing a stare-down and nothing more, it’s that cop’s job to remind him that ‘going physical’ with a cop is a bad move.

"It’s not a question of what his constitutional rights are.

Well at last check he does have a right to peaceful assembly…but hey shrug

It’s a question of what’s appropriate," Kelly hit back.

and to mess with that Harvey Levin quote: “She’s a lawyer.”

8 Likes
12

Which really means absolutely nothing. There are far more incompetent lawyers out there than good lawyers. Far more who thought law was the obvious choice because they had no other idea what to do with their lives, yet can’t find their way between logical points A and B without a map. Also, my field is full of people with personality disorders. Case in point. Makes me want to pull my hair out sometimes.

3 Likes
13

Staring is a form of speech. With the Supreme Court having ruled that money is speech, it’s a slam dunk that staring is protected.

10 Likes
14

“Let’s go back to what’s on screen here.”
– pivot away from issue. With no way to defend the real crime, FOX will deluge us with “Negro Slayers of Negroes” aka black-on-black crime.

1 Like
15

Maybe he was afraid to take his eyes off the cop, lest he be shot 16 times. In fact, this protester is more of a threat to the police than the man they gunned down in the street.

And as for “acting appropriately.” Would it not have been appropriate for some of the cops to disavow themselves of this murderer before the video came out? Instead, they spent a year acting like people were crazy to be upset about his actions. Lets see Fox start demanding cops hold each other accountable, instead of covering for every cop, no matter how bad their actions.

15 Likes
16

It is a punkinsh thing to do but given the circumstances, which Fowler did not bring up, it couldn’t be called inappropriate. The man was protesting the murder of another man by the Cops while those Cops were suppressing that protest.

Given what we now know that mans stare down was quite restrained. But he’s Black and we all know what that means to folks that watch FOX.

2 Likes
17

There’s the absolute disconnect right there: the cop hasn’t been accused of doing anything wrong, yet he has to be subjected to being stared at? The whole point of these protests is the dozens of black men who have been accused of doing nothing wrong but been subjected to death by cop. Including McDonald, the subject of this particular protest.

Just totally insensitive.

12 Likes
18

Nope, looking away is a problem, because then he’s obviously hiding something…

9 Likes
19

You know Megyn has the word “uppity” on the tip of her tongue. She longs for the day when blacks knew their place and walked public sidewalks with downcast eyes least they make eye contact with her and scare her sh*tless.

6 Likes
20

And in Megyn’s bottle-blonde shrouded mind, a black man having Constitutional rights is highly inappropriate.

12 Likes