Well, just about everyone in the mainstream media is saying it, so it must be true, right? Deval Patrick is “accusing” Kerry Healey or her campaign of dropping the dime on his brother-in-law.
Problem: it’s false.
Let’s look closely at Patrick’s statement, which we reprinted in full yesterday. Let’s focus on those portions of it that could even remotely be interpreted as “accusing” Healey or her campaign of the leak.
By no rules of common decency should their private struggles become a public issue. But this is the politics of Kerry Healey.
Read it again. “This is the politics of Kerry Healey.” Deval Patrick has been talking about changing “politics” for well over a year now. And what he’s saying here is that this incident is emblematic of the kind of politics he wants to change — the politics of vicious attack ads, the politics of personal destruction, the politics of Kerry Healey. It’s a tough charge, and obviously some will disagree with it. But it is not an accusation that Kerry Healey herself, or her campaign, actually dropped the dime on his brother-in-law.
Here’s another passage:
Her record on jobs and the economy, on health care, on higher education, on crime has been one of shortcuts, gimmicks and failure. And so rather than deal with that, she has done everything she can to change the subject.
Well, hard to argue with that. Healey has done everything she can to change the subject. She’s running ads about work Patrick did years ago, and about whether a particular convict should be paroled, not about the lame Romney/Healey record, or about her vision for the state. Sounds like changing the subject to me. But again, there’s no accusation that Healey or her campaign is responsible for this particular incident of subject-changing.
You can try all you want to change the subject and shift the blame, but we are going to expose for all just how your failed policies and your failed politics are the reason so many people are stuck and struggling and losing hope. The garbage peddlers who shopped this story around town are part of that failed politics, too.
Does he identify the “garbage peddlers”? No — because he doesn’t know who they are. But he states, correctly, that whoever they are, they are part of a “failed politics” that Karl Rove et al. have gotten very, very good at.
That’s it, folks — there’s nothing else in the statement that even remotely suggests who might have been responsible for the story.
Now, I don’t actually expect the Globe, the Herald, WBUR, and anyone else who’s been incorrectly reporting this story to issue a correction. (Interestingly, Jon Keller, despite his peculiar rant about the “faux Deval,” correctly avoids saying that Patrick blames Healey directly for the incident, and the Channel 4 TV report (“Battle for Governor features war of words”) also finessed that issue. Kudos to them for not mindlessly parroting the rest of the MSM line.) That would be too good. But I do hope that maybe they’ll alter the way they report this story, just in this one fairly important respect, from here on out.
UPDATE: The Patriot Ledger also reports this story correctly: “While Patrick stopped short of explicitly blaming Healey for leaking the story, Patrick supporters say the leak fits Healeys pattern of hammering Patrick over criminal justice matters.”
See? It’s not that hard. The Globe, Herald, WBUR, and other slackers who are screwing this up need to clean up their act.
Ok, I have to weigh in on this. I’m a big supporter of Deval, but I think it’s really lame to say that he isn’t accusing the Healey campaign of leaking this to the press. If he’s trying to finesse it by strongly implying that Healey leaked it but leaving some wiggle room if there’s a backlash, that’s even worse. If he didn’t mean the statement to be an accusation, wouldn’t his campaign be saying, “we didn’t accuse the Healey campaign, we just said it’s their kind of politics?” In fairness, even that wouldn’t be true. Healey hasn’t stooped to anything nearly this low as far as anyone can prove.
<
p>
If the Patrick campaign has some evidence that the Healey campaign is responsible, let’s hear it. Otherwise, he should move on as fast as possible because, even to a supporter like me, this sounds like just the kind of baseless accusation we’re hearing from the Healey camp.
<
p>
I think it is disingenuous of (us) patrick supporters to say “He didn’t actually accuse Healey”. Well, noooo, not technically if you look closely at the words. But he knew perfectly well how his words would be taken, and said them anyway. The strong implication was placed there quite intentionally by patrick and his campaign. Gosh, they aren’t stupid.
<
p>
But my reponse is: go Patrick. Of COURSE it was either Healey or one of her supporters that did it. HelLO. Just as Patrick left himself wiggle room in the wording, so did Healey leave herself wiggle room in the whole situation. She says “You can’t prove I did did” and he can say “Well then it is good I didn’t actually technically accuse you”.
<
p>
And this is totally up her alley. She’s already shown she would love everyone to associate with him cop-killers and rapists. how can you say this is beneath her after the “Lawyers have a right to defend criminals but you do want one as governor?” (i.e. do you want a criminal as governor?)
…is how I think this could be turned right back onto Deval and make him look the fool. Healey is going to hammer away on Deval for accusing her of something he cant prove, even though EVERYONE knows it was her campaign. Of course it was them, its typical dirty politics of the season, and it falls in line to what she has already been trying to attack him on.
<
p>
Im very concerned now about the debates, because this WILL come up, and Muffy is going to attack him and ask if he can prove the accusation, and no matter this answer, he will look bad, as much as I love and trust Deval. The media and his willing to speak out about what everyone knows is true but unwilling to say it themselve, are going to trap him into a corner, again.
<
p>
Deval simply needs to go after her now, and stop reacting to her, and she has enough of a bad record to attack without getting personal, so what is he waiting for?
That most people at home watching/reading are thinking the same thing – sounds like a Healey move.
<
p>
Deval didn’t say it, but they are.
<
p>
Look, even if she (or her people/supporters) didn’t do it or get the info from her campaign (which I argue is the most likely scenario – who else is spending so much cash on background checks of everyone associated with Deval??), she’s screwed with the blame. Why? Because she’s just spent two weeks with PROVEN attacks twisting Deval’s actual record so she could slime him.
<
p>
So people, having watched the last two weeks, will say to themselves, “This has her fingerprints all OVER it.”
I mean attacks she HAS been linked with credibly…
It’s obviously Healey or allied groups/supporters who put this out. That’s her kind of politics in this campaign. It’s all about the gutter, even in the case of something totally irrelevant like this. You’d have to be an idiot to think otherwise.
<
p>
Who else is going to randomly request an investigation of Patrick’s brother-in-law for something no one had ever heard of before, and hadn’t had any effect on him since he moved here, right before the election?
<
p>
It just SCREAMS Healey. It’s stupid to think otherwise. Patrick doesn’t have to prove it. It’s obvious. Healey should have to prove that she ISN’T behind it. The political burden of proof should be on the opponent in these slime situations, not the candidate getting slimed. If the media just buys in, shame on them. Regardless, right now, Patrick just needs to hit back. HARD.
<
p>
I’d go with something along these lines:
<
p>
Scary man voice: The SEC is investigating the Big Dig for misleading investors about safety inspections. Kerry Healey said there was nothing she and Romney could do. That’s just not true.
<
p>
It took a woman’s tragic death in the tunnel collapse before Kerry Healey did anything. But Healey still won’t take responsibility. Her response has been shameful.
<
p>
Kerry Healey: How can we trust her to be our governor?
I think how Patrick handled this is smart, because it’s got everyone talking about Healey’s campaign tactics — so, exactly how underhanded are they? Are they so bad that they anonymously shopped this story to the Globe? Or is this below even their low standards?
<
p>
I’m happy that this has gotten the MSM to stop talking about how Patrick’s not responding to accusations. They got the story wrong about the accusation, but the Healey demands of an apology plays into Patrick’s hands IMHO.
<
p>
As for the debate, Patrick will need to handle this carefully, but I think he can turn this around on her. How about talking about the low standard she set with the cop killer ad? If someone who supports her was inspired to carry out the Sigh thing, then that person was only running with something out of the same playbook.
Go watch their report. Beth Germano says that Patrick “all but accused.” That’s a characterization, and I’d say probably a fair one, but it’s really quite different from saying that he “accused.” These things really do matter. If everyone were reporting the story that way — that is to say, accurately — it would be quite different.
Read Deval’s words a few times. Tell me where he says that this was slimebag Healey sycophants playing games with oppo research? He doesn’t say it. Deval simply states that the garbage peddlers (whom the Glob and Herald know quite well) are what we need to get rid of in politics. The smell of change is in the air — hope they get a good whiff of it.
I think we are all assuming that he does not have proof….he’s a brilliant attorney..he might be setting them up for the kill
that’s the spot on the table where I’ve got my chips plunked down – and it will be a sweet moment indeed when he springs the trap!!!
I’ve been cautiously optimistic that tomorrow’s Globe will have a splashy headline showing exactly this…Followed by Monday’s front page being a huge color photo of 100,000 people on the Common for Patrick and Murray!
Why didn’t he know that his brother-in-law was subject to the sex offender registration law?
Like me, most lawyers will tell you that their knowledge of law outside their area of expertise is limited. I’m an elder law and estate planning attorney — could I tell you about the fine points of the SORB statute and regulations? Nope — no more than I could tell you about intellectual property law or the rules of evidence in anything other than a cursory fashion — and even then, I’d probably refer you to an intellectual property attorney or a litigator. I tell my clients when they ask why they should use me and not a “general practice” attorney, “would you go to a dermatologist if you broke your leg? A skin doctor and an orthopaedist may have gone to the same medical school, but they’ve been studying very different things since getting the degree.”
<
p>
SORB practice is very new and very specialized — there are a limited number of attorneys who really know this law. I’m a good lawyer, but I certainly would not have immediately guessed that a twelve-year-old conviction in another state mandated registration — particularly if there have been no further problems and no evidence or reason to believe that someone posed a threat to the broader community. Someone who has been practicing civil rights and corporate law 50 or 60 hours a week for the past 15-odd years mostly outside of Massachusetts would likely not have been reading the SORB laws, let alone bringing up the topic in conversation at the family dinner table.
But I sure knew that ALL convicted sex offenders have to register, it’s in the news all the time.
Let’s not try to polish the proverbial – well, you know.
The man KNEW, and he should have told this Sigh to get legal, or he should have gotten out in front of it. And he certainly shouldn’t have jumped to conclusions about where the info came from. There were certainly a LOT of people who knew about this.
He screwed up, now he should shut up and move on.
Maybe because he and his wife have long since reconciled, are living together in a happy and loving way raising their two kids, it didn’t occur to them to go file out a form in MA about something that happened a long time ago in California that they, until now, had managed to move past in their lives? Not that I would expect that answer to satisfy a Deval-hater…
Why do you assume lawyers advise people — even family members — about areas of law that they may not know anything about? For all we know, Sigh probably thought until a week or so ago that he WAS in compliance with the law. Of course, given how desperate your fellow travellers have become in the course of diving into the political sewer, I have no doubt that if Sigh HAD registered, someone would have leaked THAT information, even though Level I and II offenders’ information is not normally released to the general public on anything other than a need-to-know basis.
<
p>
Let’s look at YOUR assumptions and your candidate’s behavior, shall we?
<
p>
What proof do you have that “a LOT of people” knew about this whole matter outside of the immediate Patrick family, plus a few lawyers, police officers, and court officers 3,000 miles away — unless, of course, you assume that it’s perfectly all right for your candidate’s minions to stoop to conduct this kind of “opposition research” or pass it along from a third party instead of doing the right thing and saying “we’re not going there.” Do you really think it’s o.k. to callously treat a woman who has found it in herself to forgive her husband and her innocent kids as “civilian casualties” — and then blame your opponent for the result?
<
p>
Sadly, your candidate — who has nothing to sell but fear and a paper-thin resume — has failed to denounce the coward who skittered from one newspaper to another like a cockroach in the dark. If Healey had said something to the effect of “I have a supporter who was too enthusiastic in his support of me. I do not now and never have condoned this kind of tactic, and I apologize to those kids for this pain,” I might have accepted her statement. Instead, she has now demonstrated beyond a shadow of a doubt not only is her campaign morally and intellectually bankrupt, but that all the money in the world doesn’t buy you a lick of class.
“Deval hater”? “Fellow Travelers”? “‘My’ Candidate”? Lots of assumin’ going on there, pal.
FYI, I am not a Republican, nor am I a Democrat. I’m the voter that both sides hate – an informed, skeptical, Independent.
I frequently spit ballots, and have little regard for reflexive straight-ticket voters.
In my opinion, that there are four Bozo’s running for Governor this cycle. And I will hold my nose and cast my ballot for the Bozo who will do the least amount of harm.
<
p>
“Statute of Limitations”? Foreign Jurisdiction?
Read – the – Law. As the saying goes, ignorance is no excuse.
<
p>
Do I care that Deval Patrick has a brother-in-law who is a sex offender? No, I don’t.
Do I care that Deval Patrick has shown a tendency to prevaricate? Yes, I do.
Frankly, I don’t think that the Healey campaign had a thing to do with the disclosure.
It probably came from California, where a lot of people DO know about it.
You think this rapist doesn’t have enemies there?
Healey said, when asked about the revelation;”I think this is a personal, family matter, I don’t consider this a campaign issue, and I will not use it in my campaign.”
<
p>
And as for the hand wringing about the couple’s “innocent kids”? They happen to be adults.
I meant to say that I frequently split ballots, not spit ballots. Though sometimes I might feel like doing so, lol.
And they didn’t know about it either. I have no idea how old his sister’s kids are – do you?
They are adults, and have made financial contributions to their uncle’s campaign.
Deval’s statement is really trying to associate Healey with whoever fed the Herald this story, and he’s clear about why he’s trying to associate her with it, and how it ties into his theme. Now, even though he doesn’t specifically state that Healey is responsible for it, spending all that text on associating her with could be taken to imply that he’s accusing her while still preserving plausible deniability. To avoid the implied accusation, a statement of this sort needs to include something that clearly states he doesn’t mean that.
<
p>
Fortunately, Deval’s statement does include exactly that:
What that “too” says is that “the garbage peddlers” in question are someone other than Kerry Healey.
<
p>
The press may be so used to political statements creating association while avoiding outright accusation when they actually are accusations, that I think they just glossed over this and assumed Patrick was doing the same thing. But he wouldn’t have put that “too” in that sentence if he wanted to imply an accusation directly against Kerry Healey. He wants to show a similarity of tactics (and create an association in that form), and stop at that.
There will not be proof that Healey was responsible for this putrid attack on something not even marginally germane to the race. I think it’s widely accepted that it was done with her implied or explicit consent. However, that’s not documented or porbably documentable — Healey maintains plausible deniability on technicalities.
<
p>
Patrick carefully does not explicitly accuse Healey of being behind this stunt. I think it’s widely accepted that it he believes her to be the source. His release is the rhetorical equivalent of wink-wink nudge-nudge look-where-I’m-pointing-casually. However, he carefully makes sure it cannot be explicitly documented as an accusation. Patrick maintains plausible deniability on technicalities.
<
p>
Kerry’s move was much, much worse. But they both use the same technique as a means to a desired ends. You can argue over whether that’s a good or bad move, but it does take an edge off the righteous indignation in the view of many.
Running a bottom feeding, nothing-too-low racist campaign of lies, innuendo and personal smears, and getting upset because your thug-like opponent and her cofederates drags your sister, a crime victim, into it and her kids read about their family’s personal tragedy? Identical. Deval doesn’t have a leg to stand on here. Personally, I’m sick of his righteous indignation. It’s unjustified by anything Healey has done or will ever do to attack him or his family, that’s perfectly obvious.
It’s getting awfully hard to tell around here…
By implying that Healey was involved he put her on the defensive. By not actually directly stating that he thought she was involved, he can distance himself from Healey’s whining. Truly a brilliantly written speech and a stealth hit to the heart of Healey’s momentum.
<
p>
She is demanding an apology. She does not deserve one.
<
p>
Deval, don’t cave in on this one.
WCVB TheBostonChannel.com
<
p>
Patrick: Healey Leaked Report About Relative’s Criminal Past
<
p>
http://news.yahoo.co…
<
p>
Although in the story it says:
<
p>
“Late Friday, the Healey campaign demanded an apology from Patrick for making what they called “false accusations,” although the Democrat never directly accused Healey or her campaign of leaking the story.”