Rep. Michael Grimm (R-N.Y.) got into an altercation with a reporter following Tuesday’s State of the Union address, during which Grimm threatened to throw the reporter over a balcony.
Grimm initially defended his behavior, but by late Wednesday morning he apologized.
Video from NY1 shows the Staten Island congressman ending an interview with the network’s reporter after the reporter attempted to ask him about allegations of campaign finance wrongdoing.
Shortly thereafter, Grimm returns and gets in the reporter’s face, while still on camera.
“Let me be clear to you, you ever do that to me again I’ll throw you off this f***ing balcony,” Grimm says.
Grimm adds: “You’re not man enough, you’re not man enough. I’ll break you in half. Like a boy.”
Grimm initially responded with this statement, according to NY1: “I was extremely annoyed because I was doing NY1 a favor by rushing to do their interview first in lieu of several other requests. The reporter knew that I was in a hurry and was only there to comment on the State of the Union, but insisted on taking a disrespectful and cheap shot at the end of the interview, because I did not have time to speak off-topic. I verbally took the reporter to task and told him off, because I expect a certain level of professionalism and respect, especially when I go out of my way to do that reporter a favor. I doubt that I am the first Member of Congress to tell off a reporter, and I am sure I won’t be the last.”
Late Wednesday morning, the reporter, Michael Scotto, said Grimm phoned him to apologize.
Totally unacceptable behavior. the House of Representatives needs to censure Grimm. The threats are unacceptable. What is the most concerning is the disproportionate rage to a simple question that wasn’t even asked. Grimm’s response appeared real borderline mental illness.
Should Grimm have any consequences? How about that apology? Is that even adequate?
***UPDDATE***
Transcript of Grimm’s explosion:
Mr. Grimm told the reporter he would “break you in half”:
Grimm: “Let me be clear to you, you ever do that to me again I’ll throw you off this f—–g balcony.”
Scotto: “Why? I just wanted to ask you…”
[[cross talk]]
Grimm: “If you ever do that to me again…”
Scotto: “Why? Why? It’s a valid question.”
[[cross talk]]
Grimm: “No, no, you’re not man enough, you’re not man enough. I’ll break you in half. Like a boy.”
Who does Grimm think he is? Jim Moran? You can’t go around threatening somebody like they are an 8 year old child.
Ok, joking aside. It’s obvious Grimm is an arrogant jerk. The voters in his district can do better and should replace him in November. That’s the best remedy rather than a censure.
Although, using the Moran precedent, Grimm should stay in Congress another 14 years. (Yes that was a joke too.)
And not a very good one, Furby [evil grin] 👿 🙄
Yea, he was a real jerk. I was thinking of Anthony Weiner…..
He sounds like the Italian Mafia! Good lord, what a dumba$$, in front of a camera, what an idiot.
THAT’s NOT the Mafia I am worried about at the moment, if you get my drift. 😉
outbreaks like that are very revealing.
Unfit for office. As is Christie.
I haven’t totally turned on Christie but I feel I will soon.
He issued two apologies – well, two statements – the first (paraphrase) was that he stood behind his actions and comments – the second was an actual apology to the reporter.
His was the most entertaining of the republicans’ responses to the situ, bahahah!
How can anyone not “turn” on Christie? I talked to one NJ woman recently who was still in love with him. I don’t get it.
He was using the mechanisms of government against his own people. In the service of almost nothing. He is SCUM in my book.
This makes the citizens of New Jersey look particularly stupid, also. The idea that they would sit through a huge traffic jam and then take it as normal when they were told that lanes had been shut down for “a traffic study” makes them look like ignorant sheep. “It’s a traffic study, to see what happens when we close 2 or 3 lanes down of a major thoroughfare”.
I am contrarian…and have not really had time to pay attention to all of it. As I said, I probably will turn on him.
They have a different way of doing things over there – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PsWXFk68qhU
It’s New Joisey, people. New Joisey. Dontcha remember? It’s the Hudson River waterfront at Ft Lee and Hoboken. Maybe Christie will eventually exclaim in anguish: “I coulda been a contender!”
I agree. It’s hard to imagine how discerning citizens would not turn on Christy. That would be like people sticking with a president who uses the IRS to go after his political opponents, or authorizes the NSA to collect internet/cellular metadata from American citizens, or lies to the American people about keeping their doctors/insurance plans to push unpopular healthcare legislation through Congress. Oh wait, those things did happen ….. and many have not “turned” on the president.
@Kelly_3406
Good rendition of the talking points, but you missed Benghazi.
LOL!
@Pat.Herve
That does not make them any less true or relevant. It also shows that the disapproval of strong-arm tactics is situational.
We will save Benghazi for Hillary’s candidacy. According to recent reporting, she disapproved the request for more security at the embassy in Libya.
So did everyone else.
If I wanted to skip out on my taxes, I’d legally change my name to Ben Ghazi, because that way the Feds would have to pretend that I didn’t exist.
Not lawyer but I believe a verbal threat can be considered assault if the person against whom the threat is made is sufficiently convinced that something is going to happen to him/her such as the person making the threat raises a fist or picks up some instrument to strike the person or perhaps points a gun at them. In this case, it would seem Grimm is living proof that assholes can exist with no other visible means of life support.
Yea, he was pretty heated up. Definitely one in Ahole territory.
“a president who uses the IRS to go after his political opponents”
Somewhat fair criticism, but in terms of what actually happened this was being driven more by some members of Congress.
“, or authorizes the NSA to collect internet/cellular metadata from American citizens”
This is not particular to Obama. BTW I support it. Think of it this way – we have an advantage on the rest of the world in terms of processing “big data”. If we stop using it, it’s akin to unilaterally disarming a weapon.
“, or lies to the American people about keeping their doctors/insurance plans to push unpopular healthcare legislation through Congress. ”
Something like that. Hopefully the start of creating a more functional medical system.
But can you imagine a “President Christie”? A man whose major charm is telling other people to shut up and keep quiet can only go so far, I think.
I don’t think there will ever be a President Christie. It will be here when there is a President McDonnell. Those ships have sailed.
I was going to answer Kelly, but Rick pretty much did it for me above. I would only add the following:
1. How is the IRS doing the thankless job of trying to police the political action groups that hide behind their non-profit status a president using the IRS to go after his political opponents? Darrell “Joe McCarthy” Issa did his best to tie Obama to this with no success. And the reality is that most of these groups really should pay taxes under the law, including the left-leaning ones.
2. Obama didn’t initiate the NSA metadata program, but he did continue it. The jury is still out on the constitutionality of that one and if it is absolutely necessary.
3. Issa also tried with Benghazi to implicate the president with no success. And with Fast and Furious. All a dog and pony show to try to tar the president.
4. Obama did lie on Obamacare. Rookie mistake but significant.
So we have issues above that there is either no evidence that Obama or his direct staff knew about or were done (Obamacare, NSA metadata) with the best intentions of protecting the American people. In Christie’s case, we have a low-brow bully move where it is documented that everyone around the governor was aware of even if he wasn’t. Not a great comparison.
It actually looks more and more like we may see yet another Bush as the GOP choice for president…
Groan!!!!! Jeb should listen to his mother.
I don’t disagree with you about 1-3. I do disagree in #4. I believe a mistake was made rather than an intentional lie.
I hear ‘ya, Moon- but intentional or not, it wasn’t true, and it shows poor management at best. Along with the website debacle and ongoing negative aspects of the ACA, the Dems really dropped the ball on this one, knowing that legislative fixes as were done on Bush’s prescription drug law, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, etc., are a non-starter with this Congress. In the long run, the ACA is a good thing and it moved the goal posts- the GOP is now actually admitting that healthcare is broken and putting out ideas- but the ACA should have been better thought out and implemented.
Or maybe it all just proves that single-payer is the only way to go…
I think single payer is where we will end up.
I also don’t think the states should have been given an option about Medicaid. I don’t think most people realize how limited Medicaid is. Many people have no money for a variety of reasons. Should those people be without health coverage? Some people just need time to get back on their feet. Unless there are children or you are disabled, there is no Medicaid, especially for men.
So I guess if you get sick you just go to the ER and the bills are 10xs higher. Makes ZERO sense to me.
Well, middleman, if, as you advocate, Issa tried to implicate Obama in the Benghazi affair with no success, then just who WAS responsible for that deadly screw up? And who WAS responsible for the equally deadly Fast and Furious?
Who was responsible for the deadly screw up in Lebanon @ the marine barracks? Who was responsible for the capture of all those men on Battaan? Who was responsible for all the casualties on that one beach on D-Day?
You know, sh!t happens. Bad sh!t. People die. Why must we have a direct link? Why must we have a fall guy? I just don’t think like that. Within an hour after it happened, conservatives were doing the blame game towards this administration.
I am not saying that there is not a need for assessment. Of course there is. I would start looking back at riling up the masses in the middle east, once again.
Sorry, Moon, but I doubt that you have anything in your own background which would give you knowledge to assess what happened in either Benghazi or in Arizona with Fast and Furious. Your response here is an emotional one, as well as diversionary. Middleman has made a statement concerning Obama and Benghazi and on Fast and Furious, sounding as if he has access to the truth on each. I am interested in his backing up his statements with the access and professional experience which would allow such a definitive approach. Lacking that, perhaps he should start prefacing his views with appropriate caveats.
Sh*t happens and people die is naught but an excuse. In my business, people died mostly because of mistakes and failures by themselves or others.
I guess I don’t know what you did and you don’t know who I know…so our personal opinions, unless we were there, are irrelevant.
I don’t see how you can remove your personal feelings about the operatives. Nothing you have written about the current admin9istration or the Clintons tells me that you come to the table without your own emotions and biases.
Having said that, I believe I asked an unanswered question about who to blame for the bombing of the marine corps barracks, the horrible deaths and virtual wipe out of those who attempted to land on the a few of the beaches at Normandy, or the capture of thousands at Battaan.
Is it human nature to always want to go political and finger point?
History is replete with examples of those who excuse (i.e. “rookie mistake” @middleman), misinterpret (“a mistake was made” @MH), or overlook (“hopefully the start of creating a more functional medical system” @bentley) power grabs from autocrats.
Christie is repugnant because he exerts power in a raw, crude way. Obama does the same thing, but he is more subtle and promises great benefit to the masses. It does not matter that most of his promises have proven to be untrue, because one side of the political spectrum benefits at the expense of the other and thus overlooks his serial misuse of authority/power grab. So Christie gets stomped on for his crude approach, but Obama gets rewarded for his subtle, charismatic approach.
That gives Obama far more power to push constitutional limits than Christie could ever hope to achieve.
I expect that premise could be applied to almost all politicians.
Moon, this is about two serious and fatal mistakes in the Obama administration and nothing else. In neither of them have we, the citizens, gotten an answer as to ultimate responsibility for those screw ups. When an Obama supporter tries to make a definitive defense of the administration with regard to either, I want to know his/her access and evidence. Also it would help for him/her to display in some manner the kind of training and experience to be able to read and understand better than others what happened and what should have happened — in other words, how the system is supposed to work and where it failed. Otherwise, the claimaint is merely passing partisan gas destined for the revolving file.
If I started preaching to you about how to teach your speciality in the classroom, I would most likely get the same kind of response. And I would have deserved it. Let middleman give us what it takes to turn his opinion on Benghazi and Fast and Furious into reporting worthy of further contemplation or give us the caveats if he cannot. The last time I was in this kind of debate with an adamant Obama supporter, it turned out he didn’t even know the difference between a chief of station and a chief of mission.
We weren’t there. You obviously can’t remove the partisanship from your opinion. I haven’t preached.
As far as how people teach in the classroom, different people find success using different teaching techniques. What worked for you might not work for the guy next door.
“Partisanship” bull hockey. No, I was not in Benghazi per se; but I have been “there” in other places. I am more than a little interested in knowing exactly how and why and by whom our people in Libya were shortchanged security-wise — apparently at the level of the 7th Floor at State and maybe even beyond that. Not even the investigative power of the US House of Representatives has been able to get to the bottom of it. That is one damned shame for this country. And one does not kiss off the lost lives of our people who had the courage to go into harms way on behalf of the rest of us by claiming that it doesn’t make any difference now. The Hell it doesn’t. The families of the lost and the American people as a whole deserve the full truth. It’s long past time they got it. Unless one likes the idea of living in a banana republic where the bosses hide the things they don’t want the people to know. I’ve been “there” as well.
I find it amazing that you don’t see your own political biases in what you are saying, down to taking Clinton’s words out of context.
@Moon-howler
Perhaps I am showing my political bias, but my interpretation of Clinton’s words is very similar to that of Wolverine. How do you interpret what she said?
I think many current/former military members are more upset about Benghazi than the general public. Military members and diplomats put themselves in dangerous situations, but in return they need to know that everything possible will be done to reduce the risk and everything possible will be done to save lives when things go wrong.
When there are what appear to be avoidable casualties, people want an investigation to determine what happened and how to prevent future occurrences. For example, after the bombing of Khobar Towers, there were congressional hearings and an investigation by Gen Downing.
When Hillary said ‘what difference does it make now’, it seemed very cavalier and cold to those of us who expect government leaders to take every reasonable measure to ensure force protection.
“Middleman has made a statement concerning Obama and Benghazi and on Fast and Furious, sounding as if he has access to the truth on each.”
Sorry, folks, I’ve been off-line for a while- I’ll catch up with my friend Wolverine now.
Actually, Wolverine, I didn’t give any indication at all that I personally knew what happened either with Fast and Furious OR Benghazi, which is obvious from my post. The access I have to the truth consists of listening to the “hearings” conducted by that impartial bastion of truth, Darrell Issa. I don’t “advocate” that Issa tried to implicate Obama, I listened to him do it. I listened to him shut down witnesses who didn’t follow his story line and continually misrepresent the facts. The truth that I know is that Issa didn’t provide any proof whatsoever that the president was responsible in any way for either tragedy, other than sitting at the desk where the “buck stops,” which we already knew. Issa also didn’t provide any insight or service to the country as to how to prevent things like this from happening again. Of course, that obviously wasn’t his intent, as it never is with political “hit men.” No need for any caveats there, Wolverine.
I’ll turn the table for you, Wolverine- why don’t you and Issa and Fox News and the rest refrain from implications and innuendo regarding the president being directly responsible for these tragedies until you have actual facts to back it up? The predecessor to Fast and Furious was started by Bush, for example- why don’t you go search for facts on Bush?
Gotta agree with Middleman on this one.
I also am still waiting for an answer to my question about who to blame for the Marine barracks bombing in Lebanon and the Battaan debacle with thousands of troops during WWII. Just who do we blame?
@Moon-howler
The commanding officer was blamed for inadequate security in Lebanon. The marines were deployed as a peacekeeping force at the Beirut airport surrounded by higher ground. The marines were asked to avoid appearing too hostile which he interpreted as unloaded weapons for sentries and unfortified perimeter fences.
All this came out after an INVESTIGATION. As a result, it became unthinkable for American forces to be unarmed in hostile areas and irresponsible to neglect force protection.
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/military/2008-10-15-beirut-barracks_N.htm
Here’s a link to the bi-partisan Senate investigation on Benghazi: http://www.intelligence.senate.gov/benghazi2014/benghazi.pdf
As I stated earlier, the House has also had an investigation, and I agree with Wolverine and Kelly that the American people deserve to know what happened and how to prevent it in the future. I think it’s clear that the Senate report comes much closer to providing that information than the keystone kops type of “hearing” held in the House.
There was so much gotcha the first hour after that attack that it was a given that it was going to be turned on Clinton and Obama.
Middleman — You are so sure that Obama had nothing to do with Benghazi. That kind of blog certainty suggests some background and experience in terrorism/counterterrorism and personal involvement in the handling of situations/crises such as this one in Washington. Now we find out you were only watching TV and really intended to hang some kind of investigative failure on Issa. Ergo, you have no idea how to answer my own question, which pertains principally to the ultimate blame for denying to Tripoli the security enhancements which may have saved those lives. At the moment that sounds to me like a 7th Floor failure bigtime, either through direct yea or nay action or a negligent failure to focus on one of the key US diplomatic missions in the so-called Arab Spring of the time. Whatever the case, when you send your field officers into very dangerous situations, you do not leave them hanging from a security standpoint. That speaks ill of a SecState who is making noises now about the Oval Office in 2016. Her response to the Hill on Benghazi was a what the hell difference does it make now. I say it makes a big difference when you advance your own c.v. for the highest office. Anyone sees that question as partisan, tough.
That is NOT what she said, in context.
Secondly, I would question Libya being part of the Arab Spring. The genesis of instability in that country vs say, Egypt, is quite different.
The 2006-2008 gun sting operations in the Bush II administration were called “Operation Wide Receiver.” They were different in concept from previous small-scale stings and did not work out very well from a prosecutorial standpoint. They were scrubbed during Bush II. They did not result in any significant loss of weapons.
Fast and Furious was a completely new operation begun in October 2009 under the Obama DOJ/ATF . Attempts have been made to blame the whole thing on the ATF office in Phoenix. I don’t believe it. No field chief in his right mind would try such a new and risky op without having specific authorization (operational and legal) from the big boys in Washington, especially given the possibility of high numbers of working weapons, legit gun sellers being told they could break the gun laws at our behest, minimal weapon tracking capabilities, and such a close foreign border with a major “war” going on over there. If that WAS purely a field op, then the big boys in Washington had very poor command control over their own field organization, also a big no-no in this business. The fact that POTUS put a block on the availability of certain F&F docs to Congressional investigators and that Eric Holder is being said to be in contempt of Congress over his replies on F & F, there are some missing answers in this whole affair. If you think it is o.k. for our security agencies to evade replying fully and honestly to Congressional investigators, you would have loved life under J. Edgar Hoover.
Middleman, the table remains unturned.
Wolverine, from my recollection of the congressional hearings, the reason given for not turning some documents over to the Issa witch hunt were that there were security issues with that disclosure. I don’t know if that’s true, but with Issa’s track record of releasing information that puts Americans in danger, I’d certainly err on the side of caution if I were Holder. The administration DID turn over thousands of documents, if my memory serves.
The TV “we” found out about in your post #43 was in reality radio transmissions of the actual congressional hearings, and, again, I have never made any assertion that I can assign ultimate blame for any of these tragedies- a point you conveniently continue to miss. I’ve only stated that Issa did nothing to reach his goal of “getting” the president.
I feel the table beginning to move- grab it, Wolverine!