I had so little respect for McGee to begin with, but this is just amazing. It's incredible that a community leader would be such a thug.
McGee wasn't just talk either. In addition to ugly words, physical violence was one of his tactics to intimidate and get what he wanted.
The story in today's Milwaukee Journal Sentinel is jaw-dropping.
Milwaukee Ald. Michael McGee and two other men plotted to kill a man whom they suspected of burglarizing a home before deciding that he instead should be beaten, District Attorney John Chisholm said Wednesday.
In the original murder plot, $3,000 was to change hands for killing the intended victim, Chisholm said. McGee and the others later agreed on a "beat down" of the intended victim for $1,000, the district attorney said, adding that the trio referred to "peeling back" the intended target's "wig" and "sewing his cap together."
"An argument could be made that this was a conspiracy to commit homicide," Chisholm said in court.
McGee's attorney, Glenn Givens, said Milwaukee police and prosecutors are confused about street language and, at worst, McGee was part of a plan to commit misdemeanor battery.
"You have to look at who is using language and what community they come from before you make any determinations," Givens said.
Unbelievable!
No wonder McGee was a believer in the "stop snitchin' " philosophy.
He obviously had reason to promote the idea of people keeping their mouths shut.
If asked, don't tell.
McGee's attorney's explanation for the "beat down" plot is loony.
Not surprisingly, Givens is already employing the race card. People don't understand the urban language. Poor McGee is being accused of something all because the meaning of his words are lost in translation.
Supposedly, police and prosecutors don't understand the language of the street.
That's so lame!
The street is the workplace of the police. I'm sure they're familiar with the vernacular. And prosecutors certainly have been exposed to street language in their dealings with people.
Furthermore, Givens attempts to argue that ALDERMAN McGee was only planning misdemeanor battery, nothing major.
That sounds awful.
How could McGee's supporters possibly give him a pass on that?
The murder plot downgraded to a "beat down" plan is so horrible that it makes his call for people to throw bricks at speeders seem rather quaint.
The loyalty of McGee's supporters borders on pathological.
That brings us to Eugene Kane and his column, also in today's Journal Sentinel.
To sum it up, it's a load.
Yes, Kane says that McGee's supporters deserved better for their loyalty.
But most of what Kane writes lashes out at McGee's opponents.
Like McGee's lawyer, Kane whips out that oh so convenient race card.
The accusation that McGee was shaking down constituents who wanted to do business in his district is troubling, particularly in light of his frequent pronouncements about fighting for people who are traditionally shut out of opportunity in city politics.
Also troubling is how many folks are willing to throw "innocent until proven guilty" out the window simply because McGee is a public figure they never liked and always wanted to see meet a bad end.
(Granted, "innocent until proven guilty" has never resonated as much with regular folks as "where there's smoke, there's fire.")
There's a legion of people willing to call McGee a criminal now that the federal government has supplied the ammunition. To be fair, most of these people called McGee the same thing before any charges were filed in this matter.
The details of a pretty damning case against McGee are incomplete but clearly suggest the federal government thinks it has more than enough evidence to prosecute him for the kind of corruption that sends politicians away for years.
That prospect is sure to get a rise out of McGee's constituents, many of whom have given him unequivocal support since he joined the Common Council in 2004.
It's fair to say no local politician in recent years has engendered so much diverse reaction, particularly across racial lines. I get the sense some people are convinced the majority of racial problems in Milwaukee would disappear if more black people rejected Mike McGee as a leader.
That's not true, but it's what some people believe.
"A pretty damning case against McGee"?
That's putting it mildly, very mildly. The case is damn damning.
What McGee is accused of doing has nothing to do with his race AT ALL.
If he's found guilty of the charges, he's a criminal. His skin color isn't a factor.
Kane's comment that people think many of Milwaukee's racial problems would disappear if more blacks rejected McGee as a leader is interesting.
I don't think the problems would disappear if more blacks rejected thug McGee, but they certainly would be lessened.
McGee is a horrible role model -- the worst. That thug should not be in a leadership role, unless the objective is to intentionally establish an area of the city, the 6th District, as a breeding ground for crime and violence -- a sort of terrorist training camp.
A positive first step in getting Milwaukee's racial problems to disappear would be to get the "gatekeeper" McGee to disappear.
He's not a part of the solution; he IS the problem.
Kane goes on:
It's a safe bet that many 6th District residents will continue to support McGee; the word entrapment already has been bandied about on black talk radio.
Kane italicizes "entrapment."
Why?
Does he give it emphasis because he thinks it's a real possibility?
How can one be entrapped when it comes to approaching business owners and shaking them down?
I don't see how that would work.
The people gloating over McGee's predicament should remember how quickly events can change and how slowly legal matters can move toward resolution. There's a chance McGee will remain in office for months to come.
What is that?
A threat?
"Nah, nah! McGee is still in power."
Who's doing the gloating? That Kane childish streak rears its ugly head once again.
As for the voters in the 6th District who were called dupes and worse for their decision to keep McGee in office, this latest development represents either an extreme betrayal of trust by the alderman or yet another unwanted episode in his calamitous career that must be endured. In any case, they deserved better in return for their loyalty to McGee and will likely learn from the experience.
Huh?
Bribery and extortion and threats of physical violence don't qualify as part of just another "unwanted episode," not by any respectable, reasonable standards.
When it comes to putting faith in politicians, some of us have had our hearts broken before.
McGee's misdeeds (crimes) shouldn't be heartbreaking for his supporters. I admit that I don't have too much sympathy for them.
It's not like they don't know what sort of person McGee is.
They just don't care.
I think what's heartbreaking is that people have stood by this thug. They embrace him.
McGee is a bad guy, a really bad guy.
I know this is harsh, but they were fools to put their faith in him.
No comments:
Post a Comment