Friday, February 19, 2010

Town Dandy - WTF?

Away We Go
...Earlier this week, we received a call from someone we know and respect, and who has had plenty of useful information and insight in the past. This person -- Source X -- wanted to pass along some information, but wanted to remain off the record. We said OK. And then, almost instantly, we regretted it.

The story Source X told was this:

A candidate in the upcoming local elections, one that Source X could be expected to oppose, had received a fairly large campaign donation. All well and good. But the purported donor -- Person Y -- was not the actual donor at all, according to Source X. In fact, it was Person Z who provided the money for the donation. Z used Y as a pass-through, Source X alleged, to obscure the origin of the funds and contravene campaign finance laws.

"How do you know this?" we asked Source X.

Source X replied that he knew someone who had seen Person Z's bank statements, which showed a check from Person Z to Person Y in the same amount as the donation.

This took us aback. When we recovered, we had more questions. Who saw Person Z's bank statements? How did this person have access to those documents? Theoretically speaking, how could we be expected to replicate this knowledge? Source X declined to elaborate further, and signed off by expressing faith in our investigative abilities....


Wow. So many questions... And so many MORE questions...

15 comments:

  1. That's a tough lead. If anyone can figure this out, you can Rose.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks, Tom. I'm asking around.

    Sadly, what this does as it stands is taint everyone.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Sounds like a malicious attempt to turn gossip into news.

    ReplyDelete
  4. No, Hank wouldn't do that.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I think The Mirror had the scoop awhile back.

    ReplyDelete
  6. this stuff has been happening increasingly over the past years. It cuts across all party lines and has everything to do with power and control. It always wrong no matter who it is. Unfortunately many of us ignore it when it favors our side. Just think of all the skunk smelling money that was used in the DAs race.

    Hank, many of us don't give a crap how this came to light. If it is true, heads have to roll. I am not assuming that the candidate actually knew, but the people that laundered this should be outed or this will never stop.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I am not assuming that the candidate actually knew, but the people that laundered this should be outed or this will never stop.

    Hank doesn't even know if it is true, that's why they weren't 'outed'

    ReplyDelete
  8. Hank was given the tools to find out. He ignored them.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I think this article is the first in what the dandy proudly characterizes as campaign coverage that is "better than anyone else". That's wtf!

    luckily the competition won't be too stiff.

    ReplyDelete
  10. It could be anyone. Hank is responsible.

    Remember the bounty paid for a hit piece on Rodoni. We all suspected that if we could only see the bank records, something similar to this would show up - but without police powers to investigate, it is virtually impossible. And thus suspicions are all there is, they remain, but are of no use.

    There are any number of possibilities here, and speculation is running wild right now. Who, why, how, when? How much? Did the candidate know? You can't assume anything. Though it is safe to say we all assume it is true.

    ReplyDelete
  11. When I say Hank is responsible - I mean he is doing the right and responsible thing, and I am sure he is investigating, not that he is responsible in the other sense of that word. He didn't cause this.

    ReplyDelete
  12. No, Rose. Hank is not responsible. And it doesn't surprise me one bit that you would cozy up with the biggest gossip peddler in town.

    If it doesn't involve tits, weed, or Hank's own self aggrandizement, he just isn't interested. Instead of acting like a professional and waiting for the story to develop, he rushes to print the first draft! In journalism circles, a person who does this is called desperate. I would call it yet another sad example of just how low Hank is willing to go.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Hey now. Leave Hank be. I don't always agree with what he chooses to write on, but he is responsible and when he gets into a subject, he most often does the public well.

    ReplyDelete
  14. County employee 3000.00 to Bonnie!! Ray Charles can see this one. Which of Bonnies developers wants to make Tom look like a big spender and cover his bootie!!!!

    ReplyDelete

Comments are open. Play nice.