Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

A shocking betrayal

By

So Dianne Wilkerson allegedly accepted thousands of dollars of bribes in an undercover sting operation, related to a liquor license for a nightclub, starting in 2007 and continuing into this month.  This is not just being sloppy with your OCPF paperwork, or not getting around to filing your tax returns on time.  Those failings on her part were serious, and were part of the basis for our endorsements of Sonia Chang-Diaz both in 2006 and this time around.

But this is different.  If proven (and, according to the Globe, the FBI has audio and video, including a still photograph showing “Wilkerson allegedly stuffing a $1,000 payoff into her bra during a meeting with an informant at No. 9 Park restaurant … The 10, $100 bills were not in an envelope and clearly visible in the photograph dated June 18, 2007”), this is out-and-out criminality.  It’s genuine, honest to goodness, old fashioned corruption of a kind, and on a scale, that hasn’t been seen from a MA elected official in quite some time.

Remarkably, having allegedly been up to her eyeballs in bribes starting in June of 2007, Wilkerson still found it appropriate to stand up in front of her Democratic party colleagues in Denver, at the MA delegation breakfast, and make the seemingly heartfelt speech that I heard her give only a couple of months ago.  At that time, she knew she was facing a tough primary challenge.  She took the podium and spoke passionately about her remarkable family history and her supposedly burning desire to represent the poor and underserved.  She actively sought out and obtained the endorsement of many of the good Democrats in that room, as well as many who weren’t present (such as the Governor and the Mayor of Boston, to name just a couple).

And yet, if the allegations are proven, she was on the take the whole time.  If this is true, she profoundly betrayed her colleagues and her constituents.  

I’m astounded by the hubris and the hypocrisy.  But I guess I’m hopelessly naïve when it comes to this kind of thing.

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0

Comments

  1. Although having not met you, I’m assuming that you didn’t move to Massachusetts last week. This is SOP for Suffolk County and standard procedure at the state house.

    <

    p>Wilkerson has been an infamous criminal for years and the darling of the left & progressives for a hell of a lot longer. You’re statement seems alomost tongue in cheek, although I know it isn’t. Folks on the left cannot be this naive——————-can they?

    <

    p>Please.

        • Your Iron Duke link is wrong.  I assume you meant something like this article from 1964.

          <

          p>But you make my point for me.  Serious corruption, like the charges against Wilkerson, hasn’t really been seen in MA since the Ward Commission (1980, relating to corruption in construction in the 1970s).  The allegations against DiMasi, such as they are, really aren’t in the same league (at least so far).  And Finneran got drunk on power, but there’s no indication that he was in it for personal gain.

          • David,

            <

            p>The FBI affidavit (para. 3) states that “This affidavit summarizes a covert investigation into the criminal activities of WILKERSON and others which has spanned a period of approximately eighteen months.”  “And others” is the operative phrase.  Then read the affidavit, notably para. 30, which describes the culture of corruption which has so infected Beacon Hill and City Hall.  Where are the state prosecutors in all this??

            <

            p>You can view the affidavit for yourself at:
            http://multimedia.heraldintera…  

            • but I am not sure exactly what you are referring to in the affidavit that say describes a “culture of corruption”. I don’t have time to read the whole thing now. Can you be more specific?

          • Thanks… that was the Iron Duke link I intended.

            <

            p>Here is the one for John Rogers.

            <

            p>I believe most politicians are not out right criminals, but it doesn’t mean they aren’t corrupt and it certainly doesn’t mean they and their friends don’t benefit.

            <

            p>I believe most corruption is done by nice people doing nice things for nice people. And because they are all nice people, it’s OK to bend a rule or two or three.

            <

            p>Or maybe it’s really all just a technicality, and they can show that there weren’t any other bidders for a project. What harm can come from that? It isn’t as if the money is going directly into the politicians’ pockets.

            <

            p>Or maybe they know it’s wrong, so they’ll just keep these transactions behind closed doors, in restaurants, or other places that are out of the public eye.

            <

            p>I don’t have to go farther than my town borders to find examples of contracts that were handed over on silver platters to friends of politicians.

            <

            p>You enable and encourage the continuation of this behavior, giving an ether-wink and declaring such transgressions “not in the same league.” You invite them to keep pushing to see how deep they can bury and how far they can go.

            <

            p>You flatter Wilkerson with your shock.

      • David, I give you credit for posting this story.  But, really now, the left has no dibs on integrity, so why the shock?  Whether it’s an Alaskan republican senator or a Boston democratic pol makes no difference, human nature being what it is.  Get back on that horse! (just joking)

    • Perhaps Wilkerson isn’t the only one taking bribes on Beacon Hill, but I cannot believe this is widespread without a lot more evidence, and your credibility is really not very high, so I won’t just take your word for it.

      <

      p>However, I do hope that the FBI and local authorities continue to pursue this type of crime vigorously. If there are other people doing this, I want them caught.

      • Sad to say, I’ve never seen anyone other than Feds fight state corruption.  And I’m sure they have an ulterior motive.  There are groups that are part of a “solution” and groups that are part of a “_ _ _ _ _ _ _”.  Local authorities are the former.  

        • I think he prosecuted some political officials. Isn’t that one of the reasons given for why he was not elected governor.  

        • I think he prosecuted some political officials. Isn’t that one of the reasons given for why he was not elected governor.  

    • Wilkerson’s actions taint everyone else in Government and just give fodder to those who see elected officials as inherently corrupt and Government as inherently bad.

      • Wilkerson’s actions taint everyone else in Government and just give fodder to those who see elected officials as inherently corrupt and Government as inherently bad.

        <

        p>I’m not certain what it is you are saying…  Nor why you are “pissed off”.  Is it your day to be responsible for the world?  

        <

        p>There is a world of difference between someone who’s “actions taint everyone else” and the specific act of tainting with a broad brush. MCRD (et al) starts with the proposition that all are tainted and seeks evidence in support of that.  Cranky old farts are like that. The rest of us continue to trudge into the voting booth expecting better.  

        <

        p>That we are sometimes let down doesn’t, in any way, nullify our expectations or those of the next candidate.  

        <

        p>If you are upset that some people think that “government is inherently bad” then you ought to go straight up to them, look ’em in the eye and say ‘The fuck it is!’  Should anyone make the patently ridiculous claim that any career is inherently corrupt or not you should laugh at them.  Laughter, raucous and in their face, is anodyne in situations such as these.

        <

        p>

        • I’m pissed at Wilkerson. Her crime is first and foremost a betrayal of the trust of her constituents. But it does not simply stop at the borders of the 2nd Suffolk senate district.

          <

          p>As a progressive, I want politics to be inclusive. I want people to see the possibility of good government and vote accordingly. Actions such as these directly counter that goal. They turn people away from government and against the positive power of politics.

          <

          p>That’s why I’m pissed off. Because the ramifications of Wilkerson’s crime hurt the progressive movement as a whole.  

          • I’m pissed at Wilkerson. Her crime is first and foremost a betrayal of the trust of her constituents. But it does not simply stop at the borders of the 2nd Suffolk senate district.

            <

            p>And who made you responsible for her constituents?  And how do they benefit from your anger?

            <

            p>

            That’s why I’m pissed off. Because the ramifications of Wilkerson’s crime hurt the progressive movement as a whole.  

            <

            p>I don’t see it.  It does not follow.   Certain someones can try to make that claim.  But I don’t think Obama likes Ayers all that much and I don’t think people will (or ought to) see Wilkerson and throw up their hands at the progressive cause.   It doesn’t follow.

            • It’s very difficult to give rational reasons for emotions.

              <

              p>I think, petr, we are agreed on the goal. These comments are descriptive not normative: I don’t think people should get more cynical because of Wilkerson, but, unfortunately, they will get more cynical because of her.

          • Plus I think that I’d have a similar reaction even if I wasn’t in her district and hadn’t been fuming about her abandonment of progressive policy positions for years.

            <

            p>Years ago, Wilkerson colluded with Finneran et al to kill the citizen’s Clean Election Law ( http://www.massvoters.com ). She had the gall to tell me to my face that her reason for wanting to kill the law was that “my constitutents can’t afford the $5.00 contribution” that candidates were required to get along with voter sigs. to be eligible for public funds for campaigns under the clean elections law. What happened with THAT issue is reason enough to be extremely cynical and embittered about MA State politics.

            <

            p>In recent years Wilkerson’s flip-flopped on the safe nurse staffing bill ( http://protectmasspatients.org ), and the citizens health care constitutional amendment ( http://healthcareformass.org ), and more progressive issues, I’m sure. Lately when I’ve been talking to others in the district about why they should vote for Chang-Diaz I’ve been saying that Wilkerson seems to be so clearly compromised that she’s very susceptible to big money interests.  Little did I know the magnitude of that!!!!

            <

            p>The $23K in bribes put Wilkerson in a different league of betraying the public’s trust than the average lackluster pol, for sure, but I’ve been extremely angry (as many of you know) for years about the culture of no accountability to the public that permeates Beacon Hill. I think huge numbers of others are feeling something similar. That’s a large part of what the traction Ballot Question 1 is getting is all about, after all.  I’m trying very, very hard, to stay idealistic and optimistic about our country and our world while dealing with a very deep and gnawing cynicism…my two kids, and all of us, I suppose, deserve no less.

            <

            p>Being able to say “President-elect Obama” in one short week should go a long way to restore my passionate idealism.

        • Well, yes, MCRD may not be representative. However, there are a lot of people that are dead certain that to be a politician is to be corrupt. When canvassing, you run into them.

          <

          p>This was one of the attractions Weld and Romney had when they ran for office: they were not politicians and ipso facto less likely to be corrupt.

          <

          p>In some sense, this is a known cognitive effect: what’s salient gets magnified. (For example, it’s easy to overestimate how frequently the train is late because lateness is more salient than being on time.) I think, the audacity of Senator Wilkerson’s corruption might make it seem that corruption is more widespread than it is.

          <

          p>Whatever the reason, the optics are very bad. We need to get people more invested in the commonwealth not more cynical and distant from it.

          • … in MA who reflexively think this way of Democrats in particular are really just applying the rule to Democrats in particular because of the nature of the balance of party power in the state?  That is,… do you think that Dems are actually just targets of opportunity in this state because of their numbers and that makes it easier for some to perceive the rule to be generally applicable to Democrats in particular?

            • Random thoughts:

              1. Historically Democrats have been associated with city machine politics which were famously corrupt. At the beginning of the last century, the progressives were mostly Republicans.
              2. Having so many uncontested elections and a populace that believes voting completes the requirement for civic engagement, Massachusetts has a lot of unmonitored politicians.
              3. The politicians with the most power are Democrats. It’s harder to corrupt members of a legislative minority.
              4. Right-wing radio happily indulges paranoia about Democratic leadership.

              I’ll happily take adjustments to any of the above thoughts.

                •  I don’t live in her district, but I have watched in shock in awe the crap she has gotten away with for years. The only cause Diane believes in is Diane, and when anyone called her on it she said  they were racist or sexist. If she cares about any other causes than herself she will 1) resign immediately and 2) call off this sticker campaign.
                  She hurts everybody who believes in progressive government. She is an embarrassment and shame on the Governor and Mayor for supporting her in the primary. They should have known better and that was before the arrest.

                • she’d be arrested before she was arrested?  how do you propose they should have had that knowledge, crystal ball?  let’s be real here, ok?  

                • Those who endorsed her didn’t need crystal balls, they needed rear view mirrors…they knew Wilkerson’s history…tax evasion, swearing false statements in court documents, pilfering campaign funds for personal use, bullying her colleagues and anyone else who stood up to her by threatening to scream “racist” to the press….people who endorsed her knew her history and chose to ignore it to keep her from turning on them…that’s how bullies get what they want, they intimidate…and Dianne Wilkerson was and is a major league bully.
                  She knew how to play a race card and she carried a whole pack of them around to pull out for any and every occasion.

                  <

                  p>Rather than honestly serving her race, she flagrantly disgraced it.

                  <

                  p>Dianne will finally get her due and there are more than a few people on Beacon Hill and in City Hall who are smiling today because it is about time.

              • … in the question of applying the standard to Democrats when really it’s about how it applies to those in power, which in MA, happen to be Democrats.  I hear a lot of generalization about Democrats and I’m wondering how much of this is ‘learned behavior’ owing to the circumstance of Democrats being in power locally.  That is… one predisposed to have the ascribed attitude toward politicians in general, will ascribe them to Democrats (local or not) in particular in this environment.

          • is also going to affect people’s perception of how much corruption there is.  She got that support even though she already had legal problems even before this latest bomb came out. The leaders in the Mass. Democratic Party need to come out with statements that they do not condone this behavior and will do everything within their power to make sure this will not happen again.  Here’s a thought of one thing they could do…. promise to make the proceedings of the legislature as open as possible and then appoint a commmissin to accomplish that.    

          • is also going to affect people’s perception of how much corruption there is.  She got that support even though she already had legal problems even before this latest bomb came out. The leaders in the Mass. Democratic Party need to come out with statements that they do not condone this behavior and will do everything within their power to make sure this will not happen again.  Here’s a thought of one thing they could do…. promise to make the proceedings of the legislature as open as possible and then appoint a commmissin to accomplish that.    

  2. that humans are complex. We are all capable of good and bad — we hope more good than bad. Diane Wilkerson is probably entirely sincere in her support of the causes you mention. At the same time she gave into the temptation for too many politicians of considering herself above the law. The only remedy is greater accountability and prosecution for such violations of the public trust.

  3. First, we do not pay high salaries for our elected officials – for example, after 20 years, State Senator Robert Havern had a salary of $78,000.00  Not miserly but surely not lavish.

    <

    p>Why do we pay people millions of dollars to hit baseballs, and those who distribute billions of dollars, about the same a school teachers with masters degrees?  This has always seemed odd to me, once I looked into the salary range and scale.  Thanks to the Boston Herald, for example, you can find out that a registered nurse for the DMR earns more than the Speaker of the House – which says something, not sure what:

    <

    p>http://www.bostonherald.com/pr…

    <

    p>None the less, those who run for office are not supposed to be in it for the money; and there should be full reporting of the cash flow, tax returns, and other indicia of cash flow for those who hold the public trust.

    <

    p>”Light and air” lead to accountability and are the best remedy for this kind of “cash for access” third world style bribery.

    • Unlike state reps, they require expensive special training, and have to work long hours under difficult conditions. Plus there is a nursing shortage.

      • I’m disappointed that Amber would make a statement that gives the impression that nurses make more than Sal DiMasi: “a registered nurse for the DMR earns more than the Speaker of the House…”  What purpose that does serve? Yes, some nurses might earn more and I believe they are worth it. But most nurses do not earn that much, I’m sure. So, Amber, please don’t make a misleading statement like that if you’re “not sure” what you’re trying to communicate. Thanks (from a RN who’s paid about $15/hour for teaching nursing students part-time–btw there’s an even worse nursing faculty shortage and now you know one reason why.)

        • If you look at the salaries paid within DMR, DMH, etc. and within the legislature it is interesting.

          <

          p>I am NOT saying nurses aren’t worth any penny – far from it.  What nurses do is critical.  But the salaries different folks make in state government really is quite interesting, at least to me.

          • and I didn’t have time then and don’t now to search but will go back to it later this week–I’m very interested in the knowing the specifics. In a way it’s another piece of using “Follow the money trail”, an invaluable (and often depressing) tool to gain a better understanding on just about any issue and on those people, politicians and others, involved in making decisions on said issues.

  4. I will only mention a couple of items that prove you wrong David.

    <

    p>Is former House Majority Leader Jack Murphy worth a million bucks as a lobbyist?  And the other darlings listed in the recent Globe article?

    <

    p>Was Senate Majority Leader Fred Berry Billy Bulger’s Ethics Committee chairman?

    <

    p>Did anyone dare comment on my post about the Bulger brothers reign?

    <

    p>Is Wilkerson any different than the other players on Beacon Hill?

    <

    p>Municipalities are only creatures of the Legislature here in Massachusetts.

    <

    p>Let’s act surprised.  There’s gambling in Casablanca.

    <

    p> Again, give me a break!

    <

    p>

    • Speaker Flaherty and that little thing that happened in the Treasurer’s Office.

      <

      p>I’ve just never heard someone go about it in such a STUPID way! First, she gets bribed for less than a tenth of what those licenses cost. Second, she didn’t think to ask around about this “cooperating witness” when he first knocked on her door. And most obviously…she didn’t think to put a buffer between herself and this guy?

      <

      p>What an idiot. How did she get elected in the first place?

  5. “While sure, the appearances may be troubling.  But this is nothing compared to Sonia Chang-Diaz previously referring to herself as simply Sonia Chang.”  

  6. How does this affect next year’s races?  The mayor is mentioned in the Globe’s coverage.

    • He had very little to do with, and the only reason he was mentioned in the affidavit was to show how DW was trying to call in some favors to strong arm the licensing board.

      <

      p>However, “Senator Y” could be in some trouble if he knew why DW was stalling the legislation.

  7. Besides Dimasi and the FBI investigation, How long will it take for Dianne to cut a deal with the Feds to save herself, and sing about other corrupt pols on the Hill????????????????

    • Wilkerson’s best hope now is to sing like a canary.  If the US Attorney will let convicted serial murderers off with good time served for singing, Dianne has a chance of walking away without significant incarceration IF she cuts a deal and delivers other colleagues and public “servants.”  Nothing that was attributed to her, aside from actually taking the cash, could have happened without the involvement of others in the House, Senate and City Hall.  Let the chips fall where they may.

        • As much as I want to believe in the goodness of people who serve the public, I would not be surprised if more people get caught up in this.  Sad to say.  And yes, it will feed the rantings of those people who are convinced that all public officials are corrupt.  

      • was, as far as I know, illegal. Legislators prioritize and hold up bills all the time to serve their own agendas, be it to obtain a liquor license for a business in the district, or anything else. They call in favors, they form alliances, etc. It’s the nature of the business.

      • Who says there’s anybody else?  The bad acts on Wilkerson’s part that I’ve heard about, whether unethical, illegal, or just plain dumb have been her fault and hers alone.  I’m not saying everyone else is a saint, but I’m not aware of any accusations of group corruption.  It only takes one to accept a bribe; it only takes one to not file taxes; it only takes one to commit perjury.  If we’re going to use the “they did it too” defense, then let’s see some evidence.  Besides, usually when a plea bargain is struck, the prosecution is looking for testamony on the same case rather than something unrelated.

        • Go back and read the comments by the developer-friend of Wilkerson to the informants on page 27.  I don’t think that there are more than a handful of people in city and state gov’t involved in this . . . but that comment suggests that Wilkerson is not the only one

  8. A couple years of investigation.  Perhaps entrapment.  For what?  A few thousand bucks.  Like the Feds couldn’t have grabbed other state lawmakers.  Don’t they have any Federal corruption to worry about?  Have they checked into Barney and possible conflicts regarding Fannie & Freddie?  How about Nancy getting $33Mil for her husband’s tuna plant in the Great Bailout?  Or any number of Republican misdeeds.

    <

    p>Well, while the minnow is getting hooked, the great white sharks are about to hit open water.

    • So at what point does a fish cross from being a small fish to a large one? If $23,000 is too minnowy, would you be more upset at $123,000?

      <

      p>IMHO, this is a matter of public trust. We don’t want an “everyone does it” mentality to set in. So to my mind $23,000 is certainly bigger than a sardine — and probably even a trout.

      • is probably how she convinced herself it was ok in the first place.  Makes me wonder about commenters who chronically accuse ‘everyone does it’.

          • uncommon, where are all the other people who got caught? taking cash for bribes is uncommon. Very much so.

            <

            p>There may be people who come from certain industries or areas and try to help those who they know, but that’s a very different beast. Heck, the vast sum money in politics may be a common taint, but even as someone who opposes the big cash we allow in contributions to candidates, there’s a big difference between the things we all may not like and outright bribery. If outright bribery were more common, American politics would be much, much worse.  

            • Being stupid enough to take cash bribes directly is very uncommon, but bribery can take on many shapes and forms.

              • Would make a good bumper sticker.  I’d just love to see some of these presidents, senators, congressmen and their minions in the bureaucracies and courts be dealt the justice they so skillfully avoid.  Instead the G-men spend our tax money on lengthy investigation to get the little guys.  Let’s see the biggest looters do the perp walk first and work down the ladder.

                <

                p>Remember the cement mixer guys that got nailed for cheating on the big dig?  Does anyone think they did it for themselves?  C’mon!  The Feds aim at the little guy that can’t afford the high priced lawyer, who’ll cop a plea.  

                <

                p>If Dianne did all those things she is accused of, then I have to agree she is not too bright.  A trained lawyer?  It’s almost comical.  Stupidity?  Hubris?  Stupidity and Hubris?

                <

                p>Anyone remember the state rep elected while serving time in the ’60″s?  Can it happen again?

              • what’s common and legal isn’t often bad, but I will say this: if what dianne allegedly did was truly common, Massachusetts would be a MUCH worse place. If out and out bribes were acceptable, it would take a bribe to get anything done.  

      • Little wonder the great white sharks rule. They’re too dangerous to mess with.  Even if caught they get better sentencing and prisons.  Better to pick on the small fry.  

        <

        p>Little wonder they loot us with abandon.  

  9. Are the Feds looking into any of Wilkerson’s STAFF???  I saw them taking computers out of her home and office, so surely her staff will come under scrutiny, right?  

    <

    p>WHO IS ON WILKERSON’S STAFF, ANYWAY?

    <

    p>Are they all family members?  If so, there’s a great chance that they’re in on this with her.  I’d love to see if the staff is involved.  

    <

    p>BIRDS OF A FEATHER STUFF MONEY IN THEIR BRAS TOGETHER.

    • but I doubt they knew she was being bribed. For example, one of her staffers drafted legislation (per the affidavit), but that doesn’t really mean that staffer did anything illegal. I actually doubt that.  

  10. I’m finally finishing this whole affidavit and just got to this part:

    <

    p>Page 26, Section 63

    <

    p>

    August 14th, 2008, UC2 and UC3 met with Associate A to discuss the details of the joint venture and to determine whose support would be necessary to obtain title to Parcel 8. The meeting was audio recorded. UC2 and UC3 asked Associate A whether anyone eneded to be paid to obtain their support. Associate A confirmed that Wilkerson’s support was most important and the most expensive: “the biggest chunk that we gotta worry about is the Senator… this woman is extremlely powerful… If she say no, you’re fucking dead. If she say yes, you’re golden.” Associate A went on to explain that House Representative Z’s support was also important and that, “[House representative z] is, is small. Five thousand to [House Representative z].” Associate A also explained that Wilkerson “orchestrates” the “small timers” including a second named member of the House of Representatives nad a named Boston City Council. Associate A suggested that each of those individuals should be paid $1,000. Associate A agreed to make introductions to the relevant politicians so that UC2 or UC3 could make payments to them. However, Associate A cautioned, “ninety-nine percent of the times, these people would, would accept or receive these things from a source that they’re comfortable with.”

    <

    p>All that said, from reading the rest of the affidavit, it isn’t clear if Representative Z was ever bought off, because she was still lobbying him to introduce the bill in the house (even if heavily). She later went on to say that she did get him to agree to file it and that she had a “deal” with him, but that could mean anything… and isn’t necessarily nefarious.

    <

    p>But it’s not good. That’s for sure.  

  11. For anyone who has worked with Wilkerson before, you know that she isn’t one for brains or paying the bills.

    <

    p>All I know is that Chang-diaz is the new wave and am really excited about that.

    <

    p>I hope that the next to go down on Corruption charges are Sal Demasi and his little buddies at Sage Systems. Now, there is some corruption.  

Archives