Home Blog Page 2544

Why Do Republicans (and the Corporate Media Who Love Them) Divert Attention to the Laugh?

By
KathyinBlacksburg
-
1

Joe Biden did a masterful job of pointing out the “malarkey” in Paul Ryan’s tangled web of lies.  But predictably (you knew it would happen as soon as you saw the first laugh), the GOP has focused its attention on a negative frame.  The story they will tell is of “the mean, disrespectful” Joe Biden. Lowell wrote an excellent blog post about Matt Taibi’s column explaining why it is necessary to disrespect attempts to deceive us. Bipartisanship amid this kind of deception is impossible and it would be wrong to pretend otherwise.  To pretend otherwise would be to collude with the deception.

There is a reason for the GOP response. They cannot win on the facts. They never could. They can only win if they use emotion. This is something we Dems are sometimes slow to accept. While pretending to be moved by logical argument, conservatives use only emotion and no logic, while demanding logic from others. Certainly, Dems could do a better job at blending emotional appeal with their argument. And Joe showed us how. It was real, not the sniveling pretense of Paul Ryan who, for example, claimed to protect Social Security while on record for wanting to privatize it. But more to the point, the way they use emotion is manipulative and personal. That is how they try to get to us.

The frame that the GOP uses is a frame which contends: 1) “Dems are not nice;” 2) the public must be made aware that “Dems aren’t nice;” 3) Because “they are not nice,” Dems must become self-hating and believers in the false equivalence myth the media creates; 4) Dems  must be made reluctant to stand up to lies and aggression by Republicans; 5) Independents must know “Dems aren’t nice,” 6) in the finale, pretend to be the guardians of bipartisanship. Do this last thing, even while killing bipartisanship at every turn. Don’t worry about the quantum leaps necessary to make this contorted demonizing of Democrats. Have supporters ready to roll with this approach the minute they get the opportunity.

The GOP pitches this even as they use every trick in the book, even tell literally dozens of lies. The  Romney-Ryan performances made a record number of such untruths. But the frame will replace what really happened with something else altogether. You have seen it in the media last night and today.  Stay tuned.  I have already had one guy try it on me through a listserv he insinuated himself into.  

Matt Taibbi Nails It Yet Again: Biden Was Absolutely Right to Laugh at Ryan’s “beady-eyed BS-isms”

By
lowkell
-
1

As most of us are well aware, the vast majority of the corporate, legacy media is utter dreck: false equivalencies run amok; superficiality and focus on style (Obama wasn’t smiling! Biden WAS smiling!) instead of substance (e.g., Romney and Ryan lying their asses off about everything); egregious errors left and right (e.g., Martha Raddatz stating, completely incorrectly, that Social Security is going bankrupt – as Dave Roberts of Grist points out, it most certainly IS NOT); all “horse race”/”who’s up and who’s down”; completely ignoring major issues, like energy and the environment (global warming, the #1 crisis facing humanity, so far not mentioned once); etc. It’s utterly depressing and infuriating.

Fortunately, there are a few bright spots in the generally brain-dead, bend-over-backwards-to-not-piss-off-the-crazy-right-wing media. One of them is Matt Taibbi of Rolling Stone, who is out with a superb new article entitled everyone (particularly the aforementioned lamestream media morons) needs to read, entitled The Vice Presidential Debate: Joe Biden Was Right to Laugh (“Biden did absolutely roll his eyes, snort, laugh derisively and throw his hands up in the air whenever Ryan trotted out his little beady-eyed BS-isms“). Why was Biden right to react this way? Very simple:

…He was absolutely right to be doing it. We all should be doing it. That includes all of us in the media, and not just paid obnoxious-opinion-merchants like me, but so-called “objective” news reporters as well. We should all be rolling our eyes, and scoffing and saying, “Come back when you’re serious.”

The load of balls that both Romney and Ryan have been pushing out there for this whole election season is simply not intellectually serious. Most of their platform isn’t even a real platform, it’s a fourth-rate parlor trick designed to paper over the real agenda – cutting taxes even more for super-rich dickheads like Mitt Romney, and getting everyone else to pay the bill.

The bottom line, in Taibbi’s view – and he’s absolutely correct on this – is that the Romney/Ryan campaign is an utterly cynical Big Lie, so bad that “we should take patriotic offense that anyone is trying to seize the White House using such transparently childish and dishonest tactics.” And yet the cowardly corporate media (terrified of the right-wing bullies) completely fails to do its job, which is to call a spade a spade. In this case, that would be reporting the facts – and they ARE empirically verifiable, demonstrable facts – that the Romney/Ryan platform is not laughable in only one possible context: “if you’re a multi-millionaire and you recognize that this is the only way to sell your agenda to mass audiences.” But if you’re not a multi-millionaire using your millions to manipulate public opinion in your favor, then, as Taibbi concludes:

…you should laugh, you should roll your eyes, and it doesn’t matter if you’re the Vice President or an ABC reporter or a toll operator. You should laugh, because this stuff is a joke, and we shouldn’t take it seriously.

By the way, we should also be laughing at drivel like this article, a front-page story in the New York Times (supposedly the best newspaper in the country – sigh…), focused not in the least bit on substance, but instead on how Sarah Palin and other assorted Teapublican crazies (e.g., Rand Paul) feel about Joe Biden “showing his teeth” last night. Seriously, this is intended as real “news,” but in fact it’s a pathetic joke, yet another sign of the sad decline of the corporate media, as they desperately claw for “eyeballs.” It almost makes me want to claw out my eyeballs. Either that, or just laugh hysterically at the idiocy of it all…

Virginia Agrees to Remove Misleading Student Questionnaire

By
lowkell
-
0

From the Fair Elections Legal Network: 

Virginia Agrees to Remove Misleading Student Questionnaire 

Washington, DC – Yesterday, Donald Palmer, Secretary of the Virginia State Board of Elections (BOE), agreed to remove a misleading questionnaire from the Virginia BOE website that could discourage Virginia college students from exercising their right to vote in their college communities. Last week, the Fair Elections Legal Network sent a letter to the Virginia asking them to remove the questionnaire from their website on the page titled “Voter Info for College Students” and to include information that Virginia’s new voter ID law includes student IDs issued from Virginia higher education institutions.

The following quote can be attributed to Robert Brandon, president of the Fair Elections Legal Network:

“The Fair Elections Legal Network is pleased that the Virginia Board of Elections has agreed to remove the misleading ‘self-guided’ questionnaire from its website. The law is clear that no matter where a college student comes from, they can register and vote in Virginia if they so choose. Students need to have accurate information in order to vote this November.

We are also pleased that the Virginia BOE will soon send an email blast to Virginia higher education institutions with the new voter ID requirements and other important election information. Students often cite the lack of information as a reason why they do not vote. Providing clear and accurate information will help ensure students are able to go to the polls and have their vote counted this November. We look forward to working with the Virginia BOE in the future to ensure all Virginia students get the information they need to vote in Virginia.”

A copy of the letter from the Virginia Board of Elections: http://www.fairelectionsnetwork.com/webfm_send/208

The Fair Elections Legal Network’s letter to the Virginia Board of Elections: http://www.fairelectionsnetwork.com/webfm_send/207

  

# # # #

The Fair Elections Legal Network (FELN) is a national, nonpartisan advocacy organization whose mission is to remove barriers to registration and voting for traditionally underrepresented constituencies and improve overall election administration through administrative, legal, and legislative reform.

Video: Virginia Women’s Views on George Allen’s Abysmal Record

By
lowkell
-
0



Yes, he certainly is abysmal, not just in terms of his (lack of) personal character, but also on basically every issue. That includes Allen’s outrageously misguided opposition to the Family and Medical Leave Act, to equal pay for women, to a woman’s right to choose what to do with her own body, to certain forms of contraception, to embryonic stem cell research…the list goes on and on. The answer? Vote for Tim Kaine on November 6, as if your life depended on it. Because it truly might.

P.S. Also note that Allen keeps dodging the question about whether or not he supports Virginia’s invasive ultrasound requirement for women. Gee, I wonder why he doesn’t want to talk about that. Hmmmm.

Dr. Sabato needs to explain: Virginia’s astounding gender gap

By
Goldmanusa
-
0

by Paul Goldman

Anyone got Dr. Sabato’s number up there at UVA? Using the latest Virginia poll most favorable to Mr. Romney (I don’t want to get called out again by Sarah Palin and Sean Hannity and “my friend” Ann Coulter to use a Bidenism), I have to say: explaining the gender gap is way beyond this boy’s pay grade. I know a thing or two about winning statewide elections in VA, even making history more than most, statewide and locally, hoping to do it again real soon.

But I know my limits: And that includes not being able to explain a 27% gender gap? That’s a gender canyon! Romney led men by +`15% and the President led women by +12%! So while the top line number – Romney + 1 statewide – is within the margin of error, the gender gap is beyond dispute. It is beyond the margin of normal understanding.

Hello! Who says there isn’t life on Mars! I could call NASA for an explanation. But they don’t know anymore than the Rover does. So I figure: Why call a robot when you can ask Dr. Sabato? He might not know the answer. But it can’t hurt to ask right?

Fellas: A guy has to eventually learn a few things in life, hopefully the hard way though since you don’t want to miss out on a good thing either. But at some point, you kinda got to learn when a woman is out of your league, when you really don’t want to risk getting into a fight with that guy at the bar, when you really have to fold that poker hand even though you can’t stand the guy who is going to win the big pot of the night.

AND: When politics becomes a little too complicated. Granted, there are so many in Virginia politics who think they know everything and take credit for just about anything. That’s not me: I have my opinions like anyone else. But I am not afraid to admit when I do not know the answer to something. A 27% gender canyon is one of those things.

It is true that given the margins of error in polling, the actual gap is considerably less. But at the same time, the same statistical rules means the actual gap at this point could be considerably higher also!

So let’s just assume 27% is a fair numerical description of the gender canyon at the time of the NBC poll. In effect, it means that almost every white guy who doesn’t consider himself a Democrat is voting Republican this year. There doesn’t seem to be anyway to get to the Romney men’s total without such a dynamic.

The +12 for the President in terms of the female vote is a gender gap we have seen before in other states, but not in Virginia, in a contested two-way race for president if memory serves. Wilder had a big gender gap in his historic Governor’s win since it was the first in the country to feature abortion has the top substantive issue in a statewide governor’s race. But there was nothing like a 27% gender gap nor a +12 with women at least to my memory.

Moreover, we are talking presidential election here in 2012, not gubernatorial. Women, as a group, are more pro-Democratic than men, and given the President’s overall support, he will run better among women this year as he did in 2008. Given the nature of the race this year, his female support should be higher on a net bases. So like I say, a +12 is pushing it but it is explainable. But a +15 for Romney is a number that is a throwback to a different age in Virginia, when the state was reliably Republican.

In 2008, the exit polls, given the margin of error, made it impossible to know for certain whether Obama or McCain had won the male vote. The President did have a clear lead among women. The +12 projected this year is 5 points higher than the 2008 exit number but technically within the margin of error at this point. But Romney’s +15 with men is a universe away from 2008. Moreover, the gender gap in 2008 was 3% in the national exit poll here in Virginia! 3%! Now it is 27%.

True, George Bush got a +19% among men in the 2004 exit polls. But that poll claimed 1 in 4 non-white guys voted for Bush. First of all, that ain’t happening. Second of all: Romney will be lucky to get middle single digits this year among non-white men. So if you adjust the numbers, you can say that Romney’s current standing among men is roughly the same as Bush’s in 2004.

BUT: In 2004, the exit polls show that among women, Bush and Kerry where roughly tied. Even if you back out non-white women this year, those numbers don’t change that much.

Yet you say: In 2000, Bush had a +21 with men over Gore in Virginia according to a paper from Sabato’s UVA shop. But the Gore margin over Bush among women was within the margin of error. SO AGAIN: Bush managed to have great appeal to white men but without politically repelling white women.

THIS IS NOT HAPPENING THIS YEAR FOR THE FIRST TIME IN VA HISTORY.

Romney’s appeal to white men – at least by the numbers – seemingly has the opposite effect on white women, at least by the numbers from an historic point of view. Which is why I say: Calling Dr. Sabato.

In 2000 and in 2004, the exit polls also show that Bush got a decent share of the non-white vote for a GOP presidential candidate, a situation that will not happen in 2012.

Thus, from a poor demographic analysis, any potential Romney winning coalition has to be significantly different in terms of winning the popular vote.

In general terms, it would seem that Romney has two usual choices: matching Bush’s strength among white men and women, or  he as to somehow exceed Bush’s total among white men while not turning off the pro-Bush female voter in the 2000 and 2004 mold.

Or there is a third not so usual choice: hugely increase the turnout among the Bush male/female type voter. Even in this most pro-Romney VA poll, Romney is approaching the Bush male vote dynamic, but it would appear the price is some anti-Romney fallout among key female voters. But maybe not: I haven’t studied the numbers like Dr. Sabato can.

Bottom line: As Dr. Sabato correctly pointed out in his post-2000 analysis, the gender gap was the bottom line mathematical key to Bush winning in Virginia by the margin he did. The same for 2004. Here in 2012 however, Sabato expects a closer race indeed the closest race in Virginia in the modern error perhaps.

Carter in 1976 lost in large measure because he fell way short of expectations in Northern Virginia. But here in 2012, I submit the anti-federal worker mantra from the GOP has changed NOVA over the years to where it is now solidly Democratic in presidential years not merely as a case of demographic change. GOP bashing has cost them big time forever in NOVA.

In 1996, Bob Dole won a narrow three way win over Bill Clinton on the basis of a +12 with men. But it was an 18% gender gap so in that sense, I suppose one might say 2012 is comparable.

But I don’t think so in reality. This is nearly a generation later. The GOP pitch is far different than Dole against Clinton. Bottom line: I think the 27% gender gap is significant milestone if it holds. But like I say, it is beyond my pay grade at this point. So calling Dr. Sabato.

Is this just a new version of 1996 maybe with a bigger gender gap? Or is the 27%, if it holds, a sign of a whole new ball game in VA?

Ryan Pleads for “Stimulus” $$ for “Green Jobs”, Exaggerates C02 Reductions by Factor of 1 Million

By
lowkell
-
2

See here for a letter from Congressman Paul Ryan to DOE Secretary Steven Chu in October 2009, pleading for Obama “stimulus” funds for an energy efficiency project in Wisconsin that would build “sustainable demand for green jobs, “reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and stimulate the local economy by creating new jobs.” Ryan even exaggerates the CO2 emissions reductions by a factor of a MILLION (note: TOTAL U.S. CO2 emissions are about 5.6 billion metric tons; Ryan claims that this one project would slash 2,628 billion metric tons of CO2 – 500 times more than the entire country emits in a year!).

There’s so much irony here, it’s hard to know where to start, from Ryan’s clear acknowledgement that the “stimulus” creates jobs, to pressing the importance of slashing greenhouse gas emissions (so, he’s a big believer in global warming now?), to talking about the wonders of “green jobs” (I thought he believed those were imaginary, evil, corrupt, whatever). Fortunately for Ryan, Republicans have ZERO sense of irony. Or shame.

…I was pleased to learn that their Topic Area I project (the Wisconsin Energy Efficiency Project) is aimed at transforming energy efficiency retrofit markets, building sustainable demand for green jobs, and providing a model in other communities.

In addition, I was pleased that the primary objectives of their project will allow residents and businesses in the partner cities to reduce their energy costs, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and stimulate the local economy by creating new jobs. For example, the applicant believes that the business portion of their project will improve the energy efficiency of 96,000,000 square feet of buildings, result in $41 million in reduced utility bills, reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 2,628,655 million metric tons of CO2, and create or retain approximately 7,600 new jobs over the 3 year grant period and the subsequent 3 years. In addition, the residential portion of their project is designed to serve at least 14,200 homes, save approximately $12 million in utility bills and 10,035 million metric tons of CO2.

I support the Wisconsin Energy Conservation Corporation’s grant application for the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant Program, and I would appreciate it if you and the appropriate DOE officials would ensure that it is given your prompt and full consideration, consistent with all laws and regulations. Thank you for your consideration of my request.

Sincerely,

Paul Ryan

Member of Congress

h/t: David Roberts

Flashback: Joe Biden Gives Powerful Speech at 2005 Virginia JJ Dinner

By
lowkell
-
0

I posted this on Raising Kaine on 2/6/05 (yes, I’ve been blogging about Virginia politics for that long – yikes!), thought it was appropriate to re-post here given the VP debate last night.

 

Joe Biden: Most Significant Struggle Since 1932

By: Lowell
Published On: 2/6/2005 2:00:00 AM

In a 45-minute speech at last night's Jefferson Jackson Day dinner in Richmond, covered by two members of RaisingKaine, Joe Biden gave a powerful, blistering keynote address which tore into the Republicans as dangerous extremists who "say things that sound crazy, but are absolutely serious."

Before getting to the core of his speech, Biden teased the crowd that he and Mark Warner could run in 2008 ("My name is Joe Biden and I'm here to audition for Vice President of the United States of America" and even more obviously, "When I'm Mark Warner's Vice President").  Biden also hinted strongly that Mark Warner might run in 2008, and that if he did he would make a fine candidate.

In the core of his speech, Biden focused on the Republicans' plans for this country and how we Democrats underestimate them to our own grave peril.  Some of Biden's key points included:

  • He has studied neoconservative philosophy (Strauss, etc.), and has concluded that these are "serious people," albeit greatly misguided, who believe in "leveraging power" – using our military strength UNILATERALLY, even better in the face of the world's' opprobrium, to send a message to our enemies (Iran, North Korea, etc.) that we are not afraid to act and that nobody can stop us so they had better "fall in line."
  • In ominous tones, Biden stated bluntly that the neo-conservatives had "badly miscalculated," specifically in that they did not have a big enough military to do the job, and also that they have overextended America and created huge budget deficits as far as the eye can see

  • The Iraq war has been incredibly mismanaged.  In particular, the United States has "mortgaged our credibility at a time when we may need it badly." Biden specifically pointed to a scenario in which North Korea threatened to launch one of its No Dong long-range nuclear tipped missiles at the West Coast. In that case, if we go to our allies, "who's going to believe us" after we lied to them on Iraq?
  • The chances in success in Iraq at this point — and he's been to Iraq more than any other Senator by a factor of two — are at best 50/50, even after the election.
  • In Iraq, we are at serious risk of creating "an Afghanistan in the Middle East"
  • Domestically, the neo-cons believe in "devolution of government," which basically says that "anything that CAN be done at the local level should NOT be done at the Federal level."
  • Neo-cons are so committed to their domestic "devolution of government" ideology that they are even willing "to vote against things that are popular in their states and that they know will work!"
  • The Bush Administration is "the most ideological…in modern history."
  • The assault on Social Security is "not a scare tactic," but "about eliminating Social Security" and the New Deal in general." This is a "direct assault on everything we stand for;" aimed "consciously and strategically atunraveling the social contract" – and along with it the Democratic Party.
  • Democrats should "beware: this is the single most significant political struggle between the two parties since 1932"
  • The next four years are not going to be "business as usual," so the Democratic Party "better figure out what in the hell we stand for."
  • Right now, the United States finds itself in a "full blown war" against "radical fundamentalists," yet "none of us — except for the families of soldiers in Iraq — are asked to make any sacrifices." 
  • 9/11 was an "epiphany" for the United States, in which non-state actors "became an existential threat to a nation state for the first time in history"
  • Bush should have, but didn't, call for us to get off foreign oil
  • "Our [Democratic] values are under wholesale assault by leading right-wing ideologues." The battle is, among other things, over "how we value work," the "relative place of women in society," and the "elimination of collective action abroad as a means of enhancing our security."
  • "The world has changed utterly in the last decade," and "what [will] win the day will not be our necessary military might, but our values."
  • We must engage the "1 billion, 120 million" Muslims of the world
  • "Today offers us a unique opportunity to can change the world for the better"

    •  

    Virginia News Headlines: Friday Morning

    By
    lowkell
    -
    4

    Here are a few Virginia (and national) news headlines for Friday, October 12. Great job by Joe Biden last night, he definitely won that debate over Lyin’ Ryan. I’ve got a bunch of videos, statements, and my own reaction (briefly) in the diary below this one. Finally, check out the video of Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley talking about how laughter is the 100% appropriate response to Romney-Ryan’s lack of specificity, dodging, evasion, etc.

    *Biden did his job (“Biden gave Democrats hope tonight.”)

    *VP Debate 2012: The Real Paul Ryan Is Bad for America (“for his entire political career up to that point, on critical economic issues, Paul Ryan was an extremist even by the standards of the modern Republican party, which are considerably high indeed.”)

    *Biden rattles Ryan (“Vice President Biden was not about to let people forget that Ryan, and by extension Mitt Romney, are inextricably bound to the unpopular House Republican leadership.”)

    *VP debate: Biden seemed real, Ryan plastic

    *Biden talks the base off the ledge

    *And now, Joe Biden’s turn (“Bottom line: It was probably a night that put Democrats, especially those dedicated enough to watch, in a much better mood than they had been for the last week. It’s possible that might even move the needle a bit by pushing them to answer pollsters with a bit more enthusiasm. But soon enough, the nominees will be back onstage, and if Obama wants to keep any gains with Democrats that Biden may have made tonight, he’s going to have to do it himself.”)

    *Democrats are in the center of ‘polarized’ U.S. (Andy Schmookler writes: “Too often I hear that American politics has become polarized between the extreme left and extreme right. To those expressing this notion, I say: Get real.”)

    *Andy Schmookler on ‘The Chris Graham Show’

    *George Allen dodges NPR (Sad, but not surprising; Allen’s been dodging the media the entire campaign, obviously terrified of another “macaca” incident. He’s also terrified of answering substantive questions about Social Security and Medicare, as his blowoff of a forum in Fairfax demonstrated.)

    *Manchin travels into Virginia to campaign for former Gov. Kaine at Pyott-Boone

    *Allen internal poll shows him ahead in Virginia (Yeah right, whatever George.)

    *Polls paint muddled picture in Virginia

    *September decline puts state tax collections behind forecast

    *Allen, Kaine detail dueling economic development philosophies at Hotel Roanoke

    *Retired Marine stumping for Obama in Virginia Beach

    *Allen reads “Carl the Rottweiller” to home-schoolers in Blue Ridge

    *Libertarian presidential nominee visits Richmond

    *Freeze watch north and west of D.C.

    *NLDS Game 4: Jayson Werth homer wins it for the Nationals in the bottom of the ninth (Wow, what a game! Now, on to the deciding Game #5 in D.C. Go Nats!)

    P.S. Also see Paul Krugman’s Triumph of the Wrong?, in which he writes: ” If you look at the track record, the Obama administration has been wrong about some things, mainly because it was too optimistic about the prospects for a quick recovery. But Republicans have been wrong about everything.” Also: “if Mitt Romney wins the election, the G.O.P. will surely consider its economic ideas vindicated. In other words, politically good things may be about to happen to very bad ideas. And if that’s how it plays out, the American people will pay the price.”

    Video: Joe Biden Hits Lyin’ Ryan For Asking For Stimulus Funds

    By
    lowkell
    -
    14



    So what did you think of the VP debate? I thought Joe Biden did great, definitely won the debate. In contrast, Paul Ryan was a slippery, hyper-caffeinated used car salesman (shocker, I know). It will be interesting to see what the American people think of this debate, and whether it fires up Democrats and much as it should have.

    P.S. I thought Martha Raddatz did an excellent job overall – certainly a gazillion times better than the comatose Jim Lehrer last week (ugh) – and that the debate was what a debate is SUPPOSED to be!  Now, can we please have more of this in the remaining two debates?

    UPDATE 10:55 pm: CBS Instant Poll of uncommitted voters: 50% say Biden won, 31% say Ryan won, 19% saw it as a tie. Go Joe! Also, Biden went up from 39% to 56%, Ryan just from 45% to 49% on who has ability to be an effective president.

    How to make an investigation part of a cover-up and a stonewalling

    By
    doorbellqueen
    -
    2

    ( – promoted by lowkell)

    You may or may not have read or heard about Loudoun County Supervisor Eugene Delgaudio. He’s the only head of a recognized hate group (he runs the anti-gay group The Public Advocate of the United States) who currently holds elected office.

    He serves as the Sterling District Supervisor on the all-Republican Loudoun County Board of Supervisors. The current Chair is Scott York, seen in this picture hugging Eugene.

    Eugene Delgaudio has recently gotten press in the Washington Post (among other places) for firing a staff member because she reported him for using her to do fundraising calls for him, for setting a Public Advocate staff member as her supervisor, and for a host of other no-nos.

    Over the last week, I’ve had quite a bit of back-and-forth with Loudoun County staff over FOIA requests I’ve sent to them regarding Scott York’s communications with Jim Plowman about Eugene Delgaudio’s misdeeds. I posted about it over at my blog, but thought you all might like to see a cover-up in action.

    On October 2, 2012, I sent this FOIA request to Scott York:

    Mr. York,

    This is a FOIA request, made under the applicable part of the Code of Virginia, for a copy of the complaint referred to (that is, “the complaint filed against Mr. Delgaudio”) in your public statement of

    October 2, 2012. The relevant excerpt from your statement follows:

    When the Board’s leadership team was made aware of these allegations against Supervisor Delgaudio, we asked that the complaint filed against Mr. Delgaudio be given to the Loudoun County Commonwealth Attorney Jim Plowman for review.

    Please send this material to this address:

    [My address]

    Elizabeth Miller

    The next day, I got this in return, (below the fold)

    Ms. Miller,

    The information you have requested is exempt from FOIA under the provisions of Va. Code § 2.2-3705.1(1) (personnel records) and Va. Code § 2.2-3705.3(3) (employment discrimination complaints).

    Please contact me directly with any questions.

    Sincerely,

    Jennifer Grimmell

    FOIA Officer/Assistant Deputy Clerk

    Loudoun County Government

    Office of the County Administrator

    MSC 02, 1 Harrison Street, SE

    Leesburg, Virginia 20175

    703-777-0201

    jennifer.grimmell@loudoun.gov

    I immediately responded (so, on October 3),

    Dear Ms. Grimmell,

    The sections you have cited of the Freedom of Information Act do not exempt the information I have requested from disclosure under the Act.

    With respect to § 2.2-3705.1(1) (personnel records): A complaint filed with county employees is not a personnel record. The Act provides no definition, but it is obvious that the records referred to by that

    phrase (“personnel records”) are those maintained by an employer about employees. Here, the item referred to is a complaint by an individual who is not even subject to county Human Resources management. As such, any document received by the county from such person cannot be characterized as a “personnel record.” It is a complaint made by that person, not by their employer nor by Human Resources. Moreover, your citation to § 2.2-3705.13(3) (employment discrimination complaints),

    shows that you, yourself, recognize that this item is a complaint, and, therefore, is not governed by § 2.2-3705.1(1) .

    With respect to § 2.2-3705.3(3) (employment discrimination complaints): The section you cite explictily refers to an “active investigation.” The chairman of the board of supervisors has publicly

    stated that the Commonwealth’s Attorney asked to consider the complaint has decided to take NO action on it.  Accordingly, it is now an “inactive report,” as that phrase is used by the section you cited.

    The section specifically states that, “nothing in this section shall prohibit the disclosure of information taken from inactive reports in a form that does not reveal the identity of charging parties, persons

    supplying the information or other individuals involved in the investigation.”

    Accordingly, I reiterate my request for the complaint, but will accept it redacted in a form that does not reveal the identity of charging parties, persons supplying the information or other individuals

    involved in the investigation.

    All my best,

    Elizabeth Amy Miller

    Today, Ms. Grimmell responded,

    Mrs. Miller,

    On October 3, 2012, the Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to hire an outside party to investigate the allegations of violating County policy by a Board member. Please note that the records you have requested are exempt from FOIA under the provisions of Va. Code § 2.2-3705.1(1) (personnel records) and Va. Code § 2.2-3705.3(3) (employment discrimination complaints).

    I have attached a copy of the Copy Teste-Violation of County Policy Investigation for your files.

    Do you get the joke? Here’s the time-line:

    1. Mateer files a complaint. She goes to York with it. Plowman sends it to the Arlington CA.
    2. While in the hands of the Arlington CA, the investigation is “active,” so complaint cannot be FOIA’ed.
    3. Arlington CA sends it back, saying he can’t act. Investigation is now “inactive.” So the complaint can be FOIA’ed.
    4. York passes vague motion to investigate unspecified allegations of violations of county policy. Investigation is now “active,” again, so complaint cannot be FOIA’ed.

    Do you see also that the item was captioned as being about staff aides?

    • Nothing about asking for donations while meeting with applicants.
    • Nothing about violations of conflict-of-interest laws.
    • And (perhaps most importantly) nothing about violating state or federal law in the hiring, firing, or workplace conditions of staff aides. That’s because York knows, from the work of the prior board, that there are no policies governing how a supervisor treats his or her staff aides.

    The investigation will come back with a report of “no violations of county policy” because that’s the only thing being investigated, and there are no policies to violate.

    Where’s the specific instruction to consider violations of Title VII of the Federal Civil Rights Act, which prohibits workplace discrimination on religious grounds? Unless a “policy” exists that the BOS must follow federal law, there won’t be any violation of “policy” on that, either.

    Jennifer Grimmell has provided me with a record that shows that the investigation itself is actually part of the cover-up by giving staff a reason to be able to say the complaint is part of an active investigation, so is not subject to FOIA.

    So, feeling a bit frustrated, I spent a little while yesterday looking at the actual item that the BOS passed on October 3, which reads,


    BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

    ACTION ITEM

    BOARD MEMBER INITIATIVE

    AMENDMENT

    # 16

    SUBJECT: Investigation of possible violation of county policy governing Board of

    Supervisor staff aides.

    ELECTION DISTRICT: Countywide

    STAFF CONTACT: Robin W. Bartok, Staff Aide to Chairman York

    RECOMMENDATIONS: Chairman York recommends approval.

    BACKGROUND: Due to recent allegations of misconduct by a member of the Board of Supervisors the Chairman is recommending the Board give direction to the County Attorney to retain an outside party to  investigate these allegations. Additionally, the Chairman would recommend that the County Administrator be given direction to support the County Attorney in procuring these services on behalf of the Board.

    FISCAL IMPACT: County Attorney has advised that such investigation could cost between $5,000 to $25,000.

    DRAFT MOTION(S): “I move that the Board of Supervisors direct the County Attorney to hire an outside party to investigate the allegations of violating county policy by a Board member and report back to the Board at the conclusion of the investigation, and I further move that the Board approve up to $15,000 to conduct this investigation.”

    After reviewing it, I sent this email to Jennifer Grimmell:

    Ms. Grimmell,

    Thank you for providing the copy teste of the board’s vote of October 3, 2012.

    Nowhere in that record is any reference made to anything in particular, certainly not to any complaint submitted from Ms. Mateer to Mr. York. Accordingly, I ask how you are able to draw the conclusion that the motion referred to anything described in my FOIA request. No specific document is named in the motion. No specific author of any document is named in the motion. No specific recipient is named in the motion. No specific complaint, nor any specific allegation is named in the motion. No specific individual, including

    Mr. Delgaudio, is named in the motion. Reference by the county to this vague, general, imprecise motion in no way invokes the status of  “active investigation” with respect to any particular document, including that which I have requested. I also ask how you are able to draw the conclusion that a document provided by a board member’s staff aide to the chairman of the board is a “personnel record.”

    I reiterate my previous FOIA demand. Further, under the applicable part of the Code of Virginia, I now also demand the following:

    1. Any and all documents used by you, the county attorney, and the county administrator (either individually or by any one or more of you) in making the determination that the board’s direction of October

    3, 2012, referred to any particular complaint, any particular supervisor, or any particular document.

    2. Any document, other than those described in Item 1, above, used by you, the county attorney, and the county administrator (either individually or by any one or more of you), in making any determination as to the purpose, subject matter, or individuals relevant to the direction by the board in its October 3, 2012 vote, including, but not limited to, notes of conversations, e-mail, text messages, paper records, or any  other document.

    Respectfully,

    Elizabeth A. Miller

    And a few hours later, I got this in reply:

    Ms. Miller,

    With respect to your FOIA request of October 2, 2012 wherein you requested “a copy of the complaint referred to (that is, ‘the complaint filed against Mr. Delgaudio’)”, please note that Loudoun County stands by its earlier response to you (noted at the bottom of this email) that the documents requested are exempt from the provisions of FOIA.

    In addition, Loudoun County has no documents responsive your follow-up request of earlier today (also noted below).

    Sincerely,

    Jennifer Grimmell

    FOIA Officer/Assistant Deputy Clerk

    Loudoun County Government

    Office of the County Administrator

    MSC 02, 1 Harrison Street, SE

    Leesburg, Virginia 20175

    703-777-0201

    jennifer.grimmell@loudoun.gov

    Blink.

    Wait a minute. What?

    Not a single document discussing what the motion means? Not a single email back and forth about how to instruct an investigator, when the motion itself is so generic?

    I am not buying this.

    Why are they being so unresponsive? What else are they trying to hide?

    1...2,5432,5442,545...3,300Page 2,544 of 3,300












    EVEN MORE NEWS

    POPULAR CATEGORY

    ©