The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

‘Stomping Deniers’?

Posted on | October 27, 2010 | 9 Comments

In my American Spectator column this morning, I noted that Joshua Green of The Atlantic Monthly had been quick to use the phrase “brutally attacked” to describe Tim Profitt’s stomping of MoveOn activist Lauren Valle.

Well, was it an “attack”?

Green now coins the term “stomping deniers” to describe people who’ve questioned the Left’s narrative of this incident. When I first saw the TV news video of the incident Monday, my comment was: “I’m hesitant to jump to conclusions about what actually happened in this kind of made-for-TV publicity stunt.” It seemed to me that there had to be some kind of back-story to the incident, and I didn’t feel like we had the whole story.

Good hunch there, because Red State has posted this video showing what happened before the now-infamous stomping incident:

As you can see for yourself, Valle lunges at Rand Paul’s vehicle as he arrives at the Lexington event, thrusting her sign through the open window of the vehicle. This certainly appears to corroborate Profitt’s account of his concerns:

Profitt told the Associated Press that he and one of his friends had talked to police officers at the scene, trying to warn them that Valle “was getting ready to do something,” but the police answered, “That’s not our job.” When the Republican candidate arrived, Profitt and his friends tried to block Valle’s path to the candidate because they were “concerned about Rand’s safety,” Profitt told the AP.

I’m not denying anything, nor do I wish to justify Profitt’s stomping of Valle. But there were clearly extenuating circumstances here. Profitt tried to do the right thing, warning police of his worries about Valle. Police failed to act on that warning. Valle’s lunge toward the vehicle certainly could have caused Profitt to be “concerned about Rand’s safety,” and what we initially saw on the TV news video was not the whole story.

At this moment, I’m sitting here with MSNBC on the TV in my office, listening to Chris Matthews pretend that the Red State video doesn’t exist, that and that Valle did nothing to provoke the incident that followed her lunge at Paul’s vehicle.MSNBC also is ignoring Valle’s felony record. So far, Joshua Green hasn’t acknowledge Valle’s involvement in the Louisiana eco-vandalism incident, nor has he acknowledged the Red State video.

Who’s the “denier” now?

UPDATE: Profitt interviewed by a Lexington TV station:

“She’s a professional at what she does,” Profitt said, referring to the activist, “and I think when all the facts come out, I think people will see that she was the one that initiated the whole thing.” . . .
“Well I’ll just say it, if the police had done what they were supposed to do, it would have never happened,” Profitt said.

In both of these assertions, Profitt is correct. Police were warned about Valle and failed to act on that warning. And she is indeed a professional protester.

Wow. You know who’s about to show the Red State video? Keith Olbermann.

UPDATE II: OK, Olbermann just aired the video and generally mocked the idea that anyone would have thought Valle posed a threat to Paul. Olbermann then showed a statement by a official, to the same effect, and brought on a Democrat “strategist” to discuss how the incident would affect the election.

Olbermann thus abets the purpose of Valle’s stunt, i.e., to affect the Kentucky election.

Somebody in the comments, please feel free to link video of Olbermann discussing  “disruptions” at health-care townhalls, so that we can compare his treatment of those citizen-activists to his treatment of Valle.

UPDATE III: Looking for a copy of the official’s statement, I went to their Web site and found this ad where they’re claiming the Illinois Republican candidate for Senate is a tool of corporate “front groups.”

Yeah. Republicans are corrupt tools of Big Money. Like bankers who loan millions of dollars to crooks.


9 Responses to “‘Stomping Deniers’?”

  1. Ordinaryavggal
    October 27th, 2010 @ 8:38 pm

    She comes at Paul not once, but TWICE in that video. The first time straight towards his window, shoving the sign in at him. With her hood up, like the freaking Unibomber. Then, around the :50 mark, she comes around the front of the vehicle jogging straight for him again. Watch closely and you’ll see a red sweatshirt/blonde wig come around the front straight as Paul as he is walking away from the car. That is when the takedown and restraint happens. After her second attempt.

    At this point, while yes the stomp was wrong, I have no sympathy for her. You go after a political candidate, no one knows motive, you get held off and then you run around the car and go after him from a different angle? I’m thinking you get what you deserve.

  2. mike
    October 28th, 2010 @ 4:33 am

    Wow, that video changes everything. When someone rushes a high-profile public official like that, they’re a clear and present danger. Obviously, it’s easy to look back in hindsight and say “oh, she’s just a harmless kook.” But there are plenty of dangerous kooks out there, so you can’t just give kooks the benefit of the doubt. The guys who restrained her were completely justified, and it’s awful that the 24 hour news cycle caused this story to come out completely backwards.