Her theory, apparently, is that the citizens of his district, who recently reelected him in a landslide after a recall election (in which McBride's husband worked against McGee), should be punished by not having a voice on the Council.
She tries to cover herself by including this disclaimer:
I know McGee is innocent until proven guilty. But when cops get charged with felonies, especially when the crimes relate to their jobs, they don't go back on the street and resume their law enforcement duties once they're released on bail.But it makes you wonder why she didn't think of this when her hero, Scott Jensen, continued to serve in the Assembly, along with other indicted Republican lawmakers, after being indicted on felony charges.
I'd draw an analogy here because McGee, like a police officer, holds a position of power that involves the public trust and the public's business, on the public's payroll. Until he's convicted or acquitted, I don't think he should be casting votes about the people's business and the city's future. The allegations were too serious.
And, yes, I assume other indicted aldermen and legislators cast votes before they were convicted. That was wrong too, for the same reason, although there are differing degrees of seriousness depending on the case.
Jensen, charged almost five years ago and convicted 16 months ago, still hasn't spent a day in an orange jumpsuit. His appeal is still pending, and he's still walking the streets. He not only continued to vote while the case dragged on, but was reelected by the forgiving voters in his conservative district. Imagine that.