Wednesday, August 25, 2010

Hey at least he's not lying



He was telling her fo' true....the state is definitely working for him.  I think our local MSM may be working for him too. 

17 comments:

Anonymous said...

Richmond is a pure scumbag. Has anyone looked into the numerous allegations of him physically assaulting up women?

Anonymous said...

Cedric Richmond has been co-opted by AIPAC. I'm not sure of the specifics of how this happened; but I received answers from Richmond HQ that were 180° different, compared to what Richmond told me in a telephone call the last time he ran. This time, he's spouting hard-line Likudnik rhetoric

Given his apparent corruption, it's easy to see why he sold out this way. From AIPAC's perspective, he's far more controllable than Cao. While Cao has been loyal to AIPAC, he hasn't been an attack dog, like Kendrick Meek, for example.

Did you also notice? Meek, who is in some corruption brouhaha, was listed as a Richmond endorser on Richmond's site until a few weeks ago. Now he's been mysteriously removed. Although he may re-appear, given his Florida Senate nomination win.

jeffrey said...

Dude. You don't think this is a pretty slimy ad? I mean put Richmond's well documented problems aside and just look at this.

In this spot we get one unidentified young white girl relating to us a poorly defined encounter with (someone she believes is) Richmond during which she "felt threatened" although it isn't made at all clear what "threatening" behavior was on display. We aren't told where they are. (The text says "a bar in Baton Rouge" the girl does not say anything about where they are which also seems strange.) Nor are we given any other information about the context of their conversation.

Then we are presented with the young lady's account of what might be interpreted as a fairly brash statement by the person we are left to assume is Richmond Although we don't know. We don't even know who she is. We have no idea, in fact, just what sort of happening, if anything, is being describes to us at all.

We are treated to several repetitions of that tag line, though. A completely unsubstantiated and unexplained line. Delivered by a mystery person. Who we know was "really bothered" by it.

On the plus side, she has a nice hat.

I watched that ad tonight during the news and immediately thought, "Who the fuck are these slimeballs?" Thanks to Open Secrets, we learn that they are a shadowy new post-Citizens United style PAC registered by New Orleans attorney and Juan LaFonta donor, Stuart H Smith.

Smith's tactics are similar to those of a group of wealthy Texas oilmen, whose fortunes have helped fuel the high-profile, conservative American Crossroads outfit, and Appalachian coal companies, who have similarly joined forces to call for the election and defeat of candidates of their choosing.

Like these energy firms, Smith is exploiting campaign finance law changes in the wake of federal court rulings earlier this year. The most notable of these are Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission and SpeechNow.org v. Federal Election Commission. And Smith has expressed a desired to tap individuals and corporations for unlimited amounts to get his message out.


The Open Secrets article also names Baton Rouge attorney and frequent Republican donor Jimmy Burland as Assistant Treasurer of LA Truth PAC.

According to the reporting you've done here, I am lead to conclude that Cedric Richmond is probably a pretty shady dude. But equally distressing are underhanded campaign tactics like the ad you've posted here. These LA Truth PAC guys seem like pretty bad dudes too. What else do we know about them?

jeffrey said...

Dude. You don't think this is a pretty slimy ad? I mean put Richmond's well documented problems aside and just look at this.

In this spot we get one unidentified young white girl relating to us a poorly defined encounter with (someone she believes is) Richmond during which she "felt threatened" although it isn't made at all clear what "threatening" behavior was on display. We aren't told where they are. (The text says "a bar in Baton Rouge" the girl does not say anything about where they are which also seems strange.) Nor are we given any other information about the context of their conversation.

Then we are presented with the young lady's account of what might be interpreted as a fairly brash statement by the person we are left to assume is Richmond Although we don't know. We don't even know who she is. We have no idea, in fact, just what sort of happening, if anything, is being describes to us at all.

We are treated to several repetitions of that tag line, though. A completely unsubstantiated and unexplained line. Delivered by a mystery person. Who we know was "really bothered" by it.

On the plus side, she has a nice hat.

I watched that ad tonight during the news and immediately thought, "Who the fuck are these slimeballs?" Thanks to Open Secrets, we learn that they are a shadowy new post-Citizens United style PAC registered by New Orleans attorney and Juan LaFonta donor, Stuart H Smith.

Smith's tactics are similar to those of a group of wealthy Texas oilmen, whose fortunes have helped fuel the high-profile, conservative American Crossroads outfit, and Appalachian coal companies, who have similarly joined forces to call for the election and defeat of candidates of their choosing.

Like these energy firms, Smith is exploiting campaign finance law changes in the wake of federal court rulings earlier this year. The most notable of these are Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission and SpeechNow.org v. Federal Election Commission. And Smith has expressed a desired to tap individuals and corporations for unlimited amounts to get his message out.


The Open Secrets article also names Baton Rouge attorney and frequent Republican donor Jimmy Burland as Assistant Treasurer of LA Truth PAC.

According to the reporting you've done here, I am lead to conclude that Cedric Richmond is probably a pretty shady dude. But equally distressing are underhanded campaign tactics like the ad you've posted here. These LA Truth PAC guys seem like pretty bad dudes too. What else do we know about them?

Anonymous said...

Anon,

Make sure you don't take your tinfoil hat off...

What does it mean????

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQSNhk5ICTI

Anonymous said...

Richmond was disbarred for 6 months and banned rfrom practicing law for unethical behavior - why does this never get mentioned???

Anonymous said...

actually, erroll williams was listed on cedric's endorsements page a while back and he's vanished as well. of course, erroll never endorsed cedric, and hopefully won't....

Dambala said...

Jeffrey my answer to that is the ad is as slimy as the candidate. If this ad was targeting a decent man, then yeah it's uncalled for. But if you knew what I know about CR, and in particular what has happened with the MSM in the past couple of weeks, I think guerrilla warfare is called for.

The girl was involved in the bar fight story which WDSU ran. Richmond claimed it was a racial incident, this girl was claiming her boyfriend was protecting her from Richmond who got in her face and was screaming at her. I think that is a pretty important thing to know considering the nature of this guy.

the You Tube site has her full account of the story as well

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n6VTauKJLgY

It sounds to me it started over a pool game...I love that. It doesn't excuse Cedric yelling at the girl and that aspect of the guy's nature can't be stressed enough.

Clay said...

Richmond looks to cruise through the Demo primary and then face Cao where, low and behold, the MSM will finally dig up these posts and do it and then it will be $Bill Jr. vs. Cao and we know how the last $Bill vs. Cao went.

Dambala said...

He ain't cruising through anything....I think there will be a run-off.

jeffrey said...

Oh good deal. My comment made it through after all. Anyway, I don't think this incident in a pool hall reveals any of the participants' natures that is of any use to us other than the fact that they, like many of us, occasionally get into stupid pointless non-fights when they're drinking.

I suppose some people think this points to some sort of "character deficiency" unbecoming of an elected official. I completely disagree with that. They're people. People act stupid sometimes.

The ad could have focused on how CR apparently took advantage of his position to manipulate his citation and I would have thought they had something, but the producers decided not to go with that angle. Instead they chopped the tape down to something that (vaguely) tells us CR goes out to pool halls and acts rudely sometimes. And this is to say nothing of the way in which the ad removes the boyfriend from the situation leaving the viewer to wonder if CR was harassing one or two defenseless (and white) girls. And don't tell me that decision wasn't made on purpose either.

Call it "guerrilla" if you want. And I understand your frustration with getting the MSM to pay attention to the CR story at all can lead to sympathy with guerrilla tactics. But I still think this is a slimy and stupid ad.

dsb said...

Your previous work on Richmond is far, far better than this video (= Jeffrey's right). I think you've allowed your frustration to sucker you into endorsing this video--"guerrilla warfare" that can only erode your credibility. It gives your critics ammo they didn't have (much of) before.

Dambala said...

Well my answer to to that is tha I don't care what "ammo" it gives them. I'm not fighting a political war, I'm attempting to expose corrupt bastards who are stealing public money. My personal credibility has and always will be attacked, but if what I'm reporting turns out to be true..and so far id say I have a damn good track record..then the blog will survive any attack, period.

I get that every campaign is going to use the information for their own purposes...I don't give a shit. I have been working on this story for 5 months, I have sifted through over 25 pounds or documents (yes I weighed it) and I know exactly what this guy did. I'm not concerned about the election, I'm concerned about letting people know what kind of man he is....and he's not a man he's a child. His confrontation with that girl is a small indication of what I already know about him but cannot report. I think the interview is extremely valid and I make no apologies for posting it.

Beth said...

I'm with Dambala here. I want shady candidates, office holders, and public employees exposed. Other players on the chessboard will manipulate that information - as some speculate the local media is doing to give Cao an edge in the main election - but if someone like Dambala factors that in, then he's joined in the corrupt game. AZ isn't playing chess, acting in any political team's interest. He's acting in the interest of letting the sunlight expose corruption.

Jeffrey, thanks for the info on the ad. Now I know more about those guys. That's useful, too.

Anonymous said...

Can someone PLEASE do some reporting (Dambala) on the CAO connection to this attack? I mean, Cao's people are the one's putting these videos out there, and Cao's press secretary works for Stuart Smith (Of Louisiana Truth PAC fame).

This is a PURE setup. Richmond will be decimated in the R v. D race. He's being set up to fall, BIG TIME.

Anyone see Cedric's latest ads? "A republican's worst nightmare." WRONG.

Cedric Richmond is a Republican wet dream: An ethically-challenged, sleaze ball with possible indictment hanging over his head and a bunch of criminal friends. Oh yeah, and he used to idolize Bill Jefferson.

Good Luck, Dems if you vote for this guy.

DO NOT VOTE FOR CEDRIC RICHMOND if you are at all interested in holding the Congress from the Tea Baggers.

RICHMOND is a god damn ticking time bomb.

Please.

Anonymous said...

so far the least corrupt bastard seems to be Cao. sorry. but at least he votes his conscience as well, often as the lone Republican.

think hes got my vote over lafonta.

bayoustjohndavid said...

I didn't realize that you and Crouere were going to be on panel together. Crouere has written something about the barroom incident, but nothing (as far as I can tell), about the more important allegations against Richmond. Are you going to ask the former GNOR officer if he's waiting until Richmond gets into the general to write about the really damning stuff?

I know, it's easy for me to suggest that you ask a question that implies Crouere's a partisan hack, but I won't be the one on stage.