« Are Pollsters Sufficiently Factoring the Enthusiasm Gap for 2010 Mid-Terms? | Main | "It's absurd. We've lost our minds" »

Double Standard

Well, more and more details are coming out about the infamous Rand Paul - Lauren Valle incident earlier, and it's getting more and more interesting.

Ms. Valle -- the paid, professional agent provocateur of MoveOn.org -- has been making the round of the leftist media, telling her horrifying story of how she was harassed, chased, and beaten by the Rand Paul thugs, ending up with getting her head stomped into a curb.

Tragically, there's video that contradicts the story that willing dupes like Keith Olbermann are more than happy to swallow. See here and here.

So here's the story, based on the videos -- sorry, Ms. Valle, I'm gonna choose to disbelieve you and believe my lying eyes:

Ms. Valle, as noted, a professional agent provocateur for far-left radical activist group MoveOn.org, was paid to fly into Kentucky by said group to stage a stunt to embarrass Republican Senate candidate Rand Paul. The stunt was to put on a disguise and rush Paul while holding a sign referring to MoveOn.org's latest brilliant campaign -- to rebrand the Republicans as "RepubliCorp." She would rush Paul, hand him the sign (or at least hold it in front of him), and get pictures of the incident that MoveOn.org (of the infamous "General Betray-us" ads, among other gross acts of asshattery) would then spread far and wide.

Unfortunately for her, things didn't quite as Valle planned. She was spotted and identified by Paul supporters. They pointed her out to police as a potential troublemaker -- but the police declined to do anything.

Shortly thereafter, Paul's vehicle arrived on the scene. Valle broke from the crowd and rushed the right side still-moving vehicle, shoving her sign into the window until Paul's security people shoved her back. Then as the vehicle stopped and Paul exited, she circled around the vehicle clockwise, cut across the front of the SUV, and rushed Paul again. This is when the Paul supporters grabbed her and forced her to the ground.

At that point one Paul volunteer, Tim Profitt, got involved. He was standing next to where Valle had been brought down. She was on her side -- he put his foot on her shoulder and shoved her down on to her face.

No, he didn't stomp her, and his foot was not on her head.

Another Paul supporter then told Profitt to knock it off, and Profitt took his foot away.

That's the incident. At least, as recorded by the videos on the scene, before Valle started rewriting history to suit her agenda.

Now, I've said many times I'm no lawyer. I think I have a slightly above-average understanding of the law, but I know I'm no lawyer. And I'm going to apply my layman's knowledge to the situation, and -- as usual -- find metaphors and analogies that I think apply.

To me, the key elements are the actions and the backgrounds of the two principals in the incident: Valle and Profitt.

Lauren Valle, as noted, is a professional political activist with a lengthy record (including criminal) of getting involved in political stunts. She gets paid by leftists to cause disruptions and wreak havoc against their political foes.

Profitt, on the other hand, was just the opposite of Valle. Instead of being paid to attend, he was a volunteer. Even more contrasting, he was also a hefty donor to Paul's campaign. Valle was paid to be there; Profitt, in a sense, had paid to be there.

As I understand the law, there's a doctrine called "the good Samaritan" principle. That says that if someone happens on a situation and tries to help, they are safe from any accidental harm they might cause. For example, if I come across a car accident and find a person bleeding, I might put on a tourniquet. It might not be the best thing, and it might cost the person their arm, but I can't be sued -- because I did what I thought was right at that time.

There's an exception, though. If the "good Samaritan" is a medically-trained professional like a doctor, nurse, or EMT, they can -- and are -- held responsible for mistakes they make. They are held to a higher standard, because it is presumed that they ought to know better, and their mistakes are less understandable and forgivable.

In this context, I would apply the same principle. Profitt was an amateur in the field of political stunts, and acted as he saw best to help further restrain a disruptive person who had already assaulted Paul (look it up -- shoving a sign into the window of a moving car certainly ought to qualify) once and tried to do so again. When trying to restrain someone, putting them face-down is natural; it's the most helpless position. And he showed some restraint -- he didn't stomp down on her, he placed his foot on her shoulder and pushed.

On the other hand, Valle has a lengthy record of political activism, and has actually been indicted on felony charges for ecoterrorism in Louisiana. She was arrested in New York for chaining herself to Citibank's headquarters. She was arrested at the Beijing Olympics for protesting that government's human rights abuses. (OK, that one I'll give her. That's almost a badge of honor.) So she has lost any "amateur" standing in the field of political stunts -- she's a skilled pro who knows exactly what she is doing.

Further, she instigated the whole situation. She accepted the assignment to pull a political "hit" on Paul. She flew in from her home in Massachusetts (why does this not surprise me?), got her "RepubliCorp" sign, put on a disguise (including a blonde wig), and charged a moving vehicle (and not some little Prius, but a big SUV) with the sole intent of causing a disruption. And while she didn't succeed in pulling off what she wanted to -- a picture of Paul with the "RepubliCorp" sign -- she is now crafting a new myth: the harmless little woman beaten and assaulted by the Paul Brownshirts.

And here's another element that irritates me: the constant emphasis of how she was alone, just one girl -- and not even a very big one. She's petite (that's polite-speak for "short and skinny"), and here she is being manhandled by all these big, tough guys just for showing up with her sign.

Give. Me. A. Break.

She's using her sex here. She's exploiting her sex and diminutive size to portray the other side as bullies when she initiated the conflict. How sexist is that?

Remember Lynette "Squeaky" Fromme? She's five-four and maybe a hundred pounds. She got within a few feet of President Ford with a gun, and only failed in shooting him by her own incompetence (she'd ejected the round in the chamber at home, and neglected to chamber another round before pulling the trigger).

Remember Sarah Jane Moore? She was utterly average in appearance. She actually got a shot off at Ford, but a bystander spotted the gun and knocked it aside as she pulled the trigger.

Remember Lee Harvey Oswald? He was a scrawny little nebbish, not worth looking twice at.

Remeber Leon Czolgosz? He was just this guy with an injured hand -- but the bandage didn't contain a wounded appendage, but a gun that took the life of President McKinley.

Remember John Wilkes Booth? He was a renowned actor from a royal family of acting. He wasn't involved in politics.

Remember Wayne Williams? He was this skinny, short, mousy black guy from Atlanta. He certainly didn't look like a serial killer.

Remember Mark David Chapman? Chubby nerd with nerd glasses -- and a fixation on John Lennon.

Remember Ted Bundy? He was this nice, charming guy with his arm in a sling who was embarrassed that he had to ask women for help.

The point here is you can't judge by appearances, but by conduct. Yeah, Valle is a tiny little thing, but she was acting like someone intent on causing harm. And she was treated as such.

Apparently, in the eyes of the law (especially from leftist legal types, who see Valle as some kind of martyr), Profitt's offense is far greater than hers, and is what deserves all the attention and legal sanction. But in Jay Tea's Court Of Common Sense, Profitt should get a slap on the wrist (quite literally), while Valle should spend some time in jail.

But, as I said, I Am Not A Lawyer. I don't even play one on the internet.


TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/40453.

Comments (47)

Is it just my lying eyes, o... (Below threshold)
Stephan:

Is it just my lying eyes, or is Ms. Valle actually smiling during the entire "assault"?

Wow!A logical, rat... (Below threshold)
engineer:

Wow!

A logical, rational agrument.

Jay, you just lost all the liberal readers with that.

Watch for the attack of the... (Below threshold)
Stan:

Watch for the attack of the 50ft trolls

Send her to a mental instit... (Below threshold)
914:

Send her to a mental institution for a good long stay.

Looking at those videos... ... (Below threshold)
JLawson:

Looking at those videos... if she'd had razor blades in the edge of the sign, there'd have been some serious harm caused. But that wasn't her aim - if she couldn't get her shot, she was determined to become a victim ANY way she could.

As I've said before - such activism is a damn bad idea.

"Ms. Valle, as noted, a pro... (Below threshold)
Hank:

"Ms. Valle, as noted, a professional agent provocateur for far-left radical activist group MoveOn.org, was paid to fly into Kentucky by said group to stage a stunt to embarrass Republican Senate candidate Rand Paul."

Another fine example of democrat politics.

Why one could almost come to the conclusion that they cannot run on the issues.


<a href="http://www.youtube... (Below threshold)
dboy:
I'm pretty sure "Squeaky" V... (Below threshold)
GarandFan:

I'm pretty sure "Squeaky" Valle won't be pulling another stunt like this any time soon. It's all "fun and games" and "street theater" until your face down on the ground. Maybe Soros can establish a sliding pay scale based on injuries. Then they can use the same tactics as those who stage auto 'accidents'. The 'victim' is injured then sent into the scene; one bump from someone and they're on the ground screaming in pain.

Yup, dboy, thanks for that ... (Below threshold)

Yup, dboy, thanks for that video. It affirms everything I said -- it takes place as Paul gets out of his car and Valle starts her SECOND rushing of him. Note that by the other videos, she's already ran up to his car window once, then circled around the vehicle and was charging him a second time.

Note that only Profitt engages in anything like excessive force (and is chastised for it), numerous calls for the police to FINALLY get involved, and the flying blonde wig part of Valle's disguise. I appreciate the backup.

J.

I'm not going to argue that... (Below threshold)
Some liberal:

I'm not going to argue that she wasn't there to make a scene. Yes, she was smiling because she gained the attention she wanted. That's no excuse for some vigilante head stomper. (She wasn't smiling after that)

They had actual security people at the event, yes? These sort of stunts happen all the time (both sides) at political rallies Yes? Is that an excuse to break into violence? No.

Separate issues. Charge them both if you want.

GarandFan, you forget the m... (Below threshold)

GarandFan, you forget the most obvious career choice: professional soccer player in Europe. Those people are LEGENDARY at taking dives.

J.

Just to be clear, from a ci... (Below threshold)
yetanotherjohn:

Just to be clear, from a civil suit standpoint (I'm not up on KY criminal law but it is probably close to the civil side) assaut is the putting someone in fear of an unwanted touch and battery is actually making the unwanted touch.

So if Paul saw her approaching the vehicle or shoving the sign at him and he did not want such a touch, it is an assault. If she actually touched him, that is battery. I can't tell either of those from the video (but I am open to better eyes than mine spotting something). Attempted assault and battery is clear. Is there a scratch on the car? Is she guilty of violating traffic laws (e.g. jaywalking)? Given the video who isn't violating traffic laws there).

For Profitt is likely not guilty of assault as Valle wasn't in a position of seeing/fearing the unwanted touch, but there is a good case for battery. The degree of force is not controlling in battery. Does he have a defense in his actions where those of a reasonable man attempting to protect another? I think he has a good case.

That's no excuse for som... (Below threshold)

That's no excuse for some vigilante head stomper.

If you watch the video yourself and stop regurgitating the BS talking points, you'll see there was NO head involvement and NO stomping.

Man, you are just stuck on stupid, ain't you?

J.

IF she had razor blades, IF... (Below threshold)
lori:

IF she had razor blades, IF she had a gun, IF she could shoot laser beams out of her eyes...
I guess I'm confused about freedom of speech & PHYSICAL VIOLENCE.

She was wearing a wig? Her ... (Below threshold)
Tea Puppet of the Billionaire Koch Brothers:

She was wearing a wig? Her goal was to engage in a political stunt? And yet RWers who fancy themselves heirs of the original Boston Tea Partiers of 1773 are upset about this? And the same RW tools who violated her First Amendment rights were wearing hats that quoted the Constitution ("We the People")?

The Onion couldn't make this stuff up.

She would rush Pa... (Below threshold)
Eric:
She would rush Paul, hand him the sign (or at least hold it in front of him), and get pictures of the incident...

I wonder who was supposed to take the pictures? Did she have an accomplice with her who was supposed to ensure that the pictures were taken?

a simple truth for your lyi... (Below threshold)
wayne:

a simple truth for your lying eyes; No one's foot belongs on anyone's head!

That's no excuse f... (Below threshold)
That's no excuse for some vigilante head stomper.
There was no head stomping, next time look at the video before displaying your ignorance.
Yes, Lori - you are.<... (Below threshold)
JLawson:

Yes, Lori - you are.

It's all fun and games and good political activism - until someone does something REALLY stupid and gets taken down for it. Or flattened, as Rachel Corrie found when trying to play tag with a bulldozer. It's funny how when the driver can't see you he can't stop in time...

As it is - she was REALLY pushing the boundaries of what would even be considered sensible, much less safe. Charging at a moving vehicle with a sign? That's just plain stupid. Wave a sign? Sure. Scream, chant, bang on a drum? Go right ahead - knock yourself out.

But as Jay Tea pointed out - it takes just a couple of seconds to change from being an innocent bystander to shooting someone. Security guards for the candidates CANNOT afford to assume anyone's harmless when they act in a threatening manner, neither can casual bystanders. They'd already alerted the police and were watching her - what more should they have done?

Ever notice, by the way, that political 'activism' of this type seems to be exclusively leftist?

a simple truth for... (Below threshold)
a simple truth for your lying eyes; No one's foot belongs on anyone's head!
Then its a damn good thing that Tim Profitt didn't put his foot on anyone's head.
he gently placed his foot o... (Below threshold)
marty:

he gently placed his foot on her neck/head/shoulder area, as any trained security wannabe would if they saw a woman on the ground

Need to get your eyes check... (Below threshold)
JLawson:

Need to get your eyes checked, Wayne - it never WAS on her head.

Look for yourself - why believe what others tell you when you can check the video?

Think for yourself - it's the way to freedom.

She was wearing a ... (Below threshold)
She was wearing a wig?
Just one clue that she had a nefarious intent, especially added with the knowledge she was a known activist for the opposition.
Her goal was to engage in a political stunt?
Her intent had not been conveyed to anyone at the scene prior to her attack on Rand Paul. as she charged the candidate no one had any reason to suspect her intent was benign. And there is still no real evidence that her intent was benign.
And yet RWers who fancy themselves heirs of the original Boston Tea Partiers of 1773 are upset about this?
Subduing an attacker pretty much defines the mold of the people that would be heirs of the BTP. Actually the original tea partiers would've probably actually stomped on her head instead of restraining themselves as was done.
And the same RW tools who violated her First Amendment rights were wearing hats that quoted the Constitution.
Uh... you'll have to show me where you think the First Amendment gives you the right to attack or charge someone in a hostile manner as Valle did.
The Onion couldn't make this stuff up.
If people can make up head stomping that didn't occur then the Onion could make it.
MoveOn.org paid her to comm... (Below threshold)
Socratease:

MoveOn.org paid her to commit criminal acts? Isn't that a crime?

Is it just my lying eyes, o... (Below threshold)
Stephan:

Is it just my lying eyes, or did Ms Valle's glasses remain in place during the "head stomping"?

lori-"IF she ha... (Below threshold)
914:

lori-

"IF she had razor blades, IF she had a gun, IF she could shoot laser beams out of her eyes...
I guess I'm confused about freedom of speech & PHYSICAL VIOLENCE"

I think we just found code pink a replacement for Valle during her incarceration.

Imagine the nerve of that w... (Below threshold)
FreddyK:

Imagine the nerve of that woman, trying to protest against a loyal and patriotic American. This is what happens when the country's media apparatus is taken over by left-wing psychopants. The dumb ones get goaded into demonstrations of their ideological fervor without recourse to facts or even a bit of restraint. Shame on her.

Y'alls got it wrong. That d... (Below threshold)
Wetback Spic:

Y'alls got it wrong. That dum beech shuda bin kicked harder. Rand sez its about the issues, nuthin but. She brawt her lefty politics where it didnt belong. Real Americans want a government that respecs our constitution and treats its citizens rite. She got in the way of our democratic right to protect the American way of life. People who disrespect America and what it stands for otta be taken to the woodshed. We live in the greatest country and people should never forgit that.

Funny how righties can say ... (Below threshold)
Kitty:

Funny how righties can say that a woman with a sign poses a big threat to a candidate, yet they can go to Obama events displaying GUNS in full view and say it is not a threat. Hmmmmmn. I guess the pen really is mightier than the sword.

Kitty:There has neve... (Below threshold)
Stephan:

Kitty:
There has never been an Obama event where GUNS were displayed in full view. The Secret Service would "stomp" on (in a real and forceful way) anyone who concealed or open carried any firearm anywhere near the POTUS, right before hauling them off to jail. To think otherwise shows just how divorced from reality some lefties can be.

Funny how righties... (Below threshold)
Funny how righties can say that a woman with a sign poses a big threat to a candidate,
Funny how no righties claimed that "a woman with a sign" was a threat or acted on subduing her until she attacked their candidate. Funny how lefties say that a someone attacking/charging in a hostile manner isn't a threat if they later claim it was a 'protest' I don't remember anyone ever getting away with charging/attacking the current President with a gun, which would be the correct analogy in this instance. Yes, I do understand an attack with a gun is more serious than an attack with a sign or fists, but a peaceful display of guns is legal, and an attack of any sort is not.
Try rushing Obama with a si... (Below threshold)
JLawson:

Try rushing Obama with a sign, Kitty - and see how gently you're laid on the ground with guns to your head.

There has never be... (Below threshold)
There has never been an Obama event where GUNS were displayed in full view. The Secret Service would "stomp" on (in a real and forceful way) anyone who concealed or open carried any firearm anywhere near the POTUS, right before hauling them off to jail. To think otherwise shows just how divorced from reality some lefties can be.
Actually I googled this and there are a number of incidents of people openly displaying guns "at" an Obama event. The "at" is contestable as most reference people outside the event venue, but the MSM of course construes this to be "at" the event. As these were 'righties' just exercising their constitutional rights, so no one was in danger from them. Just imagine the horror if the irrational dingbat 'lefties' actually decided it was OK to carry guns.
kitty russell-"Fun... (Below threshold)
914:

kitty russell-

"Funny how righties can say that a woman with a sign poses a big threat to a candidate, yet they can go to Obama events displaying GUNS in full view and say it is not a threat. Hmmmmmn. I guess the pen really is mightier than the sword."


I've never been to an "Obama event". I'd rather vomit. I dont own a gun though with the way these tards are pulling the country I may get a few dozen.

Having a sign doesn't pose a threat, unless it says "kick me hard" and is stuck to your back. Sorry to say that if some whackjob comes charging at a political candidate, they need to bew dropped and restrained period.

Wow, the trolls really latc... (Below threshold)
howcome:

Wow, the trolls really latched on to this thread. It's like they are all trying to create a narrative for this story. I wonder how many of them get so spitting angry about the leftists protests that shut down whole cities? I even bet this little nitwit lady has been involved in some of those protests.

Turns out that comment #3 w... (Below threshold)
Sheik Yur Bouty:

Turns out that comment #3 was the thread winner!!

"Wow, the trolls really lat... (Below threshold)
jim m:

"Wow, the trolls really latched on to this thread. It's like they are all trying to create a narrative for this story. "

Yeah. Leftists can beat a couple in New Orleans and put a girl in the hospital with a broken leg and that's not news. But some lefty crank gets restrained from assaulting a GOP candidate and it's the end of civilization.

And the same RW tools wh... (Below threshold)
Jay Guevara:

And the same RW tools who violated her First Amendment rights were wearing hats that quoted the Constitution.

OT for this case, but a general point for all left-wing morons: the First Amendment pertains only to restraints on speech by the government. If one of the parties to an incident is not the government, the First Amendment does not apply, contra virtually every left-wing numbnuts who bleats about the First Amendment when someone disagrees with him.

You do not have the Constitutional right to say whatever you want wherever you want. If you doubt this, try exercising your "First Amendment" rights to your boss. Text us from the line at the unemployment office on how that worked out.

I live in Texas and if anyo... (Below threshold)
WildWillie:

I live in Texas and if anyone charges towards me with anything in their hands is in for very serious action no matter what the sex or size.

The lefties here (Obama now says we can call them enemies) seem to approve of rushing towards candidates with things in their hands without fear of repurcussions. Do we now know for sure that the left side is stupid? Yes.

JT, the commenter: Wetback Spic is beyond the pale and I suggest he should experience Olaf's hammer. ww

And the same RW tools wh... (Below threshold)
SCSIwuzzy:

And the same RW tools who violated her First Amendment rights were wearing hats that quoted the Constitution ("We the People")?

I guess you came from the Kos school of civics and history...

Only the government can violate someone's First Amendment rights.

I have seen the video refer... (Below threshold)
candy.smyth:

I have seen the video referenced above and concur with the description. If you try to follow Ms. Valle's statements, you will get lost. She said that she never got within 5 feet of Dr. Paul, but the video is clear that her face and hands were in his car window with him in that seat. She lies numerous times, as does MoveOn.org about hospital visit, injuries, the wig, and so forth. If you like someone they can turn their place over in your lap and you won't mind. If you don't like them, the way they hold your spoon will drive you nuts (paraphrased quote). If you want to see aggression toward a WOMAN, see Jack Conway on youtube.com raising his voice and hand to his female staffer and a reporter. He had an altercation with a FEMALE staffer for an opponent in an earlier campaign. He is a dyed in the wool hypocrite.

Women shouldn't be allowed ... (Below threshold)
stan the man:

Women shouldn't be allowed in politics or public anyways. Except Sarah Palin. Now thats a girl I'd let boss me around. I say we give a gold metal to that guy. Yous guys know what he did was a goodly thing.

I wonder whether our curren... (Below threshold)
Murgatroyd:

I wonder whether our current crop of leftard trolls would have condemned Rosey Grier in 1968 ... Remember how he beat up poor Sirhan Sirhan for exercising his right to confront a political candidate with his "symbolic speech"?

Good post. In the name of ... (Below threshold)

Good post. In the name of shameless self promotion I've posted something on this topic as well. Several political pundits and activists have come out to perpetuate the "poor delicate 'girl'" meme which would get any man in another time and place castrated for insinuating that Valle was weak and helpless. If I disempowered Valle as "just a girl with a sign" I'd be flogged by the PC police.

Maureen "Are Men Necessary?" Dowd weighed in on it as did some mangina over at Huffington Post.

http://glpiggy.wordpress.com/2010/10/28/liberal-responses-to-womans-stomping-is-misogyny/

Great post. Wonder if the ... (Below threshold)
Ellie Light:

Great post. Wonder if the dinosaur media bothers to point out these facts.

It is not a coincidence tha... (Below threshold)
epador:

It is not a coincidence that Capri Anderson is suing Charlie Sheen, is it? Or did she take a cue from sister Lauren? Birds of a feather, I'd say.

.... I have an above-averag... (Below threshold)

.... I have an above-average knowledge of the law .... although I'm not a lawyer ....

Two Pluses already!

A man after me own heart.




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

tips@wizbangblog.com

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy