Thank you for featuring my video. The chief actually went to the building I was at and tried to get me in trouble the next day, luckily my bosses are the best ever and are backing me completely. I’ve gotten a bunch of hate from the people in my town saying I was in the wrong. Thanks!
He is the perfect example of why people don’t trust the police.
[bg_collapse view=”button-orange” color=”#4a4949″ expand_text=”Show More” collapse_text=”Show Less” ]
- I can see why the cop is so emotional being in his third trimester and all.
- The only one being disrespectful here is the foul mouthed cop. He’s in the wrong line of work. He has serious psychological issues. He will cost the city a fortune some day when he flips out on someone without a camera.
- He just can’t admit he’s wrong, like most cops.
- Having an attitude about standing up for your rights is not against the law. It actually is standing up for every single one of us. The police, like this example, is what makes most of us no longer willing to back them up like before. The people of her town who think it’s okay to harass a working woman, Shame on them! We need to limit the power we have bestowed to this profession. We need to get rid of Qualified Immunity, it protects the wrong type of police more often than not.
- This cop is truly scary. Be careful, I can’t imagine what he does when he knows he’s not on video. Egomaniac tyrant is right…
- This officer lied about being able to get ID. Every time an officer lies about the law we should legally be allowed to disregard everything that comes after, and no arrest be legal. How can we be expected to trust an officer once they’ve lied?
- He just can’t let it go. NO de-escalation here. MASSIVE ego problem with no LAW training or knoledge
- “Dont be an ass”
-while being an ass
- The minute she made a small apology, it generated LARGER bullying and intimidation tactics from him.
- “Anyone can wear a janitorial shirt.”
Anyone can wear a police uniform these days it seems
- This tyrant did all that talking about “doing his job”, but walked away. He just wanted to be a bully.
- He didn’t even try to get her ID after she flat-out stated that she wasn’t handing it over. From then on, she was detained for his pleasure while he lectured her for going in public while in “possession of an attitude”, and nothing else.
- I can see his descalation training was wasted on him.
- If she gave him her full name, and her ID matched the name, how would that prove to him she was there to clean?
- With less of an attitude the LEO actually means “I want you to lick my boots and answer every question with Yes Sir”
- Ask this tyrant, “Is attitude a misdemeanor or a felony?”
- I did a shot every time this guy said “that’s fantastic” and now I’m hammered.
- This cop cried to his chief. Who then tried to get her fired
- This situation is too common.
If the cop would observe the “suspect” for a few minutes he would see work being done and a complete absence of criminal activity. At that point there would be no reason to approach her.
- This guy is has been picked on until he graduated grade 8 and became a cop. Now imagine if that was a black male, that guy would have had back up in 1 minute.
- She hurt his feelings. I think he’s going to call his mom and cry.
- “What words do you wish me to say to appease your fragile ego so you can leave?”
- I hope he gets disciplined, because a cop that says “I can act however I want” is a threat to society.
- soooo all I heard here was the officer wanted to uphold his emotions, not the law… because he wasn’t citing law, he was citing attitude.
- Could he drop a few more f bombs while telling someone else not to have an attitude?
My question is what does giving her name/id matter? What does he have a magic list of names that works in the building along with a list of names/employees of outside contractors like the janitorial staff? And or a list of the hours employees for that building?
- “Next time be courteous” says officer Butterbean F’ing away at a woman. The reason he sat there for that time, was because he was checking the plates. Officer we’re not as stupid as you look!
- Cops have a huge ego and when you challenge them they have a hissy fit. I would have reminded him that I’m a tax payer and I pay his wages.
- He really blows it when he says if she’s gonna have an attitude, she’s gonna have a problem … oooof.
- Yes, I realise that her camera saved her from physical abuse. That cop look like a controller and abuser of his office.
- Had she been a woman of color the whole conversation would’ve been all the way different. I’m so glad the young lady held her ground and was allowed to go do her job.
- Love your channel brother.
Keep em coming.
I am Canadian. But i love cop watch from around the world.
Every nation needs to hold their government employees to account.
The price of freedom is eternal vigilance!
Keep being vigilant brother!
- If she wants to have an attitude that’s not against the law. It’s amazing how police officers try to tell you how to feel and act. They hate pushback and they hate to be challenged. That is what he’s mad about.
- Boy, this guy just has to have the last word
- Cracks me up when cops say “but I don’t know who you are” does this mean he knows everyone that he comes into contact with? I’ll bet he doesn’t remember all the names and ages and addresses of all he’s run ID on, unless of course he demands ID just to remember. Stop using that reason to get ID, It’s lame.
- He’s was asking for an ID even though it wasn’t a stop. He never put on the lights. How does she know if that was a cop.
- ‘Lose the attitude’ must be one of their little power phrases they teach them in goon school. It’s definitely a cop thing. You know, when they’re trying to talk down to you or act like they’re somebody’s daddy. Ugh…
Now why would ANYBODY have an attitude with the police?? Hmm…
- Eight minute lecture on being nice while he’s asking for something he’s not entitled to.
- Imagine if she didn’t know her rights.
Do you believe the cop would have let her go about her business.
- He absolutely cannot act as he wants in “his official capacity”…. this guy’s not just a tyrant cop but I xan assume he acts like this at home with his wife also..
- Why does he feel like he can tell her how to talk he’s using his position of power to bully her
- If this is the way they treat their own people just imagine how they treat women and children in a war zone.
- She should get his bodycam he said some more shit on his way back to the car.
- How many times did he say “I don’t know who you are.” It seems like that is the only thing he finds out of place.
- I know, you know, and the officer knows, that shining that light in your face is rude.
Let’s start there. Then, get the hell off of our property! “I Gotta Call” is NOT probable cause!
- A funny side idea would be for her to run to the door, go in and lock him out. Just funny, not recommending it.
- The old ‘I don’t know who you are’ game.
Did you notice after she apologized fat boy escalated.
- Another cop with hurt feelings. I had this happen to me , put my key in the door and left the cop standing outside I was done talking.
- Now that I know who you work for!
I can get one of those vests anywhere.
What an ass, complete reversal of what he initially said and his idea of a dignified retreat.
Bah, this cop has an attitude and knew he would get a complaint made against him hence the backdown.
- Even if she is rude to him he has no right to be rude back to her when acting in his professional capacity. The fact he lets his emotions control his demeanour shows he is unfit to hold his position
- Wow. This cop reeks of entitlement.
- Love his courteous behavior saying F@#K,A@# etc. while giving advice on courtesy. Such a power struggle for no reason! Gees, she’s got to go clean it’s not an easy job..been there done that!
Do your thing girl, a nice clean office is much appreciated!
- Police need to be held accountable. I dealt with this as a young man all the time. They do the same tactics all the time. Now they are realizing these old school German tactics don’t work anymore. God I love it..
- The police are breaking the (Constitutional) law if they take your ID and run it. This is considered “detainment” and without probable cause, the police are breaking the law. If the police are caught out with no probable cause, they will LIE about it saying they thought they smelled pot, or they thought they saw a gun, or they saw you exchanging an envelope with someone (who was Black and disappeared into the night) and they believed you had just made a controlled substance purchase, etc.. We the people must know the law and respectfully but firmly push back against the growing lawlessness of the police across this whole country, (and straight up into the SCOTUS)
- “That’s fine, Now that I know you work here” Well I told you I worked here earlier and showed you the keys and my uniform And you said well I can go pick up a shirt like that from the store. So out of curiosity how do you know that I work here now? What it looks like is you realize you fucked up. Because there’s no new evidence that can verify my story from what I told you the first time. You’re clearly just fishing
[/bg_collapse]
How McKinsey Makes Its Own Rules
The consulting company chases after government contracts, but it has a habit of evading the oversight that comes with them.
This article is copublished with ProPublica, the nonprofit investigative newsroom.
It’s not easy being McKinsey & Company these days.
For most of its 90-odd-year existence, the prestigious management consultancy prided itself on remaining above the fray. McKinsey consultants plied the executive suites of Fortune 500 companies, counseling chief executives with discretion and quietly building a business that, with $10 billion in annual revenues, is now bigger than many of the entities it serves. The substance of the company’s work, and even the identities of its clients, lie concealed under an institutional code of silence. That reticence, enforced by a nondisclosure agreement, bedeviled Pete Buttigieg’s presidential campaign until last Monday, when McKinsey granted him a rare dispensation to reveal the names of his former clients.
On the occasions when McKinsey’s work has been scrutinized of late, it hasn’t reflected well on the firm. Reporting by The New York Times, ProPublica and others over the past 18 months has raised serious questions about how it does business at home and abroad: corruption allegations against companies McKinsey partnered with in South Africa and Mongolia; a federal criminal investigation into the firm’s bankruptcy practice in the United States; attempts to deny that it helped put into effect controversial Trump administration immigration policies; and evidence that McKinsey cherry-picked nonviolent inmates for a pilot project and made it seem that an attempt to curb violence at New York City’s Rikers Island jail complex was working (it wasn’t). McKinsey has denied wrongdoing in each of these instances.
These and other examples of McKinsey’s recent conduct reveal a common dynamic. An examination of these episodes, including thousands of pages of documents and interviews with dozens of current and former McKinsey consultants and clients from multiple projects, suggests McKinsey behaves as if it believes the rules should bend to its way of doing things, not the other way around.
McKinsey’s self-regard has long been uncommonly high. In the firm’s 2010 internal history, a copy of which ProPublica obtained, partners compare the firm to the Marine Corps, the Roman Catholic Church, and the Jesuits: “analytically rigorous, deeply principled seekers of knowledge and truth,” the history’s authors write. One McKinsey partner went a step further, declaring without a hint of irony that the firm’s trait of shared values is more than “even the Catholic Church can promise.”
This attitude works for the firm in corporate consulting, an unregulated field where McKinsey’s reputation leaves it largely free to do things its own way and where its insistence on not being publicly credited has also shielded it from blame for its failures. But as McKinsey has expanded its consulting empire in recent years, it has taken on a growing book of work for government entities, as well as for corporate clients in areas subject to government oversight, such as advising bankrupt companies on restructuring.
In that field, consulting firms confront a web of contracting, disclosure and ethics rules that are designed to dictate and limit their behavior. These rules exist to prevent governments from wasting taxpayer money on underqualified or overpriced contractors and to protect government integrity and avoid conflicts of interests. In recent years, as McKinsey has burrowed deeper into this world, interviews and records show, it has developed a habit of disregarding inconvenient rules and norms to secure, retain and profit from government work.
Consider McKinsey’s imbroglios in South Africa and Mongolia. The firm did not follow the due diligence protocols commonly deployed to avoid running afoul of anti-corruption laws. The result: Its consultants found themselves working alongside dubious local companies that got them entangled in corruption investigations. Only after McKinsey became embroiled in the South Africa corruption scandal did the firm decide it needed to put more stringent safeguards in place.
In the United States, a damning but largely overlooked report issued in July by the Office of Inspector General for the General Services Administration, the hub for federal contracting, depicted McKinsey as ignoring rules and refusing to take no for an answer. The report examined McKinsey’s attempts to renew a major long-running contract in 2016. The firm was asked to provide additional pricing information to satisfy federal contracting rules. Rather than comply, McKinsey went over the contracting officer’s head, lodging complaints with top G.S.A. officials, who refused to exempt the firm from the rules.
Eventually, the firm found a friendly G.S.A. manager who was willing to not only award the contract, but also manipulated the G.S.A.’s pricing tools to increase the value of the contract by tens of millions of dollars. The report concluded the manager “violated requirements governing ethical conduct.”
The pattern repeated itself when McKinsey failed in multiple attempts to win a separate contract around the same time. Stymied, according to the report, McKinsey browbeat the contracting officer, threatening to resubmit the proposal until it got its way. The G.S.A. manager again intervened — for reasons left unexplained by the report — and McKinsey got its contract.
The report’s assessment of McKinsey’s behavior was withering, and it revealed that the firm subsequently used the same friendly manager to help secure contracts at three other federal agencies in 2017 and 2018. “Multiple contracting officers,” the inspector general wrote, told investigators that McKinsey’s requests were “inappropriate” and “a conflict of interest.”
The report recommended that the G.S.A. cancel the contracts, which as of earlier this year had earned McKinsey nearly $1 billion over a 13-year span. In a response to the report, the G.S.A. stated that it would ask McKinsey to renegotiate the contracts to lower the price. “If McKinsey declines” or “renegotiations do not yield a result in the government’s best interest,” the agency wrote, it would cancel them. Neither has happened to date, according to federal contracting records. A McKinsey spokesman said: “We have reviewed the report and the relevant facts, and have found no evidence of any improper conduct by our firm. We are in negotiations with G.S.A. and look forward to completing them soon.” A G.S.A. spokesperson said it is negotiating for “better pricing” and will not award McKinsey any further work under the contracts until those negotiations are concluded.
McKinsey has also taken steps to evade public accountability. As ProPublica reported, a senior partner leading McKinsey’s work at Rikers asked top corrections officials and members of the consulting team to restrict their communications to Wickr, an encrypted messaging app that deletes messages automatically after a few hours or days. That insulated some of McKinsey’s work from government oversight and public records requests. (“Our policies require colleagues to adhere to all relevant laws and regulations,” a McKinsey spokesman said. He neither confirmed nor denied the use of Wickr.)
Speaking more broadly, the McKinsey spokesman said: “We hear the calls for change. We are working hard to address the issues that have been raised.”
McKinsey has so far escaped serious repercussions for its reluctance to follow inconvenient rules. That could change next year.
Consultancies such as McKinsey, which advise companies restructuring under bankruptcy protection, are required to disclose potential conflicts of interest. For the past few years, McKinsey has been locked in a complicated set of court disputes with Jay Alix, the founder of a competing advisory firm, and with the Justice Department’s bankruptcy watchdog over whether McKinsey failed to follow bankruptcy disclosure rules, a subject The Times has covered in depth.
McKinsey has, since then, disclosed a number of new potential conflicts in old bankruptcy cases and paid $32.5 million to creditors and the United States trustee to settle claims over insufficient disclosures. The trustee has said that “McKinsey failed to satisfy its obligations under bankruptcy law and demonstrated a lack of candor.” The firm denies wrongdoing and says it settled “in order to move forward and focus on serving its clients.”
Subsequently, McKinsey has moved, in effect, to rewrite the rules. It drafted a protocol ostensibly meant to clarify what advisers like itself need to disclose. Critics pointed out that McKinsey’s protocol allows such firms to avoid disclosing relationships they deem indirect or “de minimis.”
There remains more to come. Apart from the criminal investigation, a judge in Houston has scheduled a trial in February to decide the merits of Mr. Alix’s allegations. The judge, David R. Jones, has described the trial in apocalyptic tones. It will be, Judge Jones has said, “the ultimate career ender for somebody.” For McKinsey, a trial would mean being called on to defend its work in public — with real accountability and real consequences for its actions. The firm might even benefit in the long run from the sunlight.